Re: PG19 regression in ecd9288624a: JSON_ARRAY() indexes that go stale

On Wed, Nov 4, 2026 at 1:45 PM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:

>
> The lists are clearly getting less and less readable. Parts of that is an
> increase in the rate of issues being found - those are ofen real, and we
> have
> to somehow deal with that. Part of that is lots of entities doing
> automated
> patch review via the list. That's not useful and makes seeing actual
> content
> ever harder.
>
> I don'd see how making the lists unreadable is in the interest of even the
> biggest LLM fan. Having lots of patches that no human looks at ever doesn't
> help anyone. So I think we need to start enforcing some basic rules around
> what is and what isn't ok.
>
>
To be clear, we can agree here. Step 1 on a conversation with Nik and
Andrey was the concept of
human conversation plus [x] footnotes that reference the AI stuff you do
not want to see (and we want to be clear).

Footnoting seems like the PG approach here that should work. (Making the
research part of what
other AIs might want to consume, still available).

Also, in defense of Nik, he is not using "some LLM in chat". He is on
the cutting edge with tooling.
He has created (and tested, and improved) a group of working AIs that have
found numerous bugs,
then used other models to confirm they are real. He has gone as far as
integrating them into performance
monitoring down to OS Flame Graphs... Using various levels of AI
interaction. Rerunning things for days
until he, as an intelligent human, is concurring there is an issue... (ie,
this is NOT AI slop)

So, this problem is going to keep coming up. I personally AGREE with you
that we want to separate
what the AI was doing from the HUMAN discussion that requires
comprehension, in order to reduce the
cognitive load on the humans. How?

This is step one. But your response seemed to imply that AI related
patches and fixes are all the same,
and you don't want to see any part of them. Clarify if I am not correct.

My question is simply... Should we set a rule that such LLM generated
stuff should always be a footnote?
Personally, I think this makes sense. What say you?

Thanks!