On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 3:25 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:
>> On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 9:02 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>> Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:
>>>> Please lets not waste effort on refactoring efforts in mid dev cycle.
>>> Say what? When else would you have us do it?
>> When else would you have us develop?
> In my eyes that sort of activity *is* development. I find the
> distinction you are drawing entirely artificial, and more calculated to
> make sure refactoring never happens than to add any safety. Any
> significant development change carries a risk of breakage.
You clearly have the bit between your teeth on this.
That doesn't make it worthwhile or sensible though.
I've offered to do it slowly and carefully over time, but that seems
not enough for some reason. What is the real reason for this?
I assume whoever does it will be spending significant time on testing
and bug fixing afterwards. I foresee lots of "while I'm there, I
thought I'd just mend X", so we'll spend lots of time fighting to keep
functionality that's already there. Look at the discussion around
archive_command for an example of that.
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2011-09-08 17:34:02|
|Subject: Re: Large C files|
|Previous:||From: Heikki Linnakangas||Date: 2011-09-08 16:35:37|
|Subject: Fast GiST index build - further improvements|