Re: Fix and improve allocation formulas

Hi,

On Thu, Dec 11, 2025 at 10:39:55AM -0500, Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2025-12-11 13:27:56 +0000, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:
> > - 0002 is a very large patch. I think that it provides added value as mentioned
> > above but I'm not sure it is worth the noise. Anyway it is done, so sharing
> > here to get your thoughts.
>
> I find the recent trend to sent auto-generated huge patches to the list
> ... not great. I think there's practially zero chance of them getting applied
> and it takes away mental bandwidth from stuff that has a chance.
>
> I tend to agree that what you propose is the better style, but I seriously
> doubt that
>
> a) changing over everything at once is worth the backpatch hazard and review
> pain
> b) that to judge whether we should do this a 277kB patch is useful

Yeah I agree that it's almost impossible to review such big patches. The idea
was more to show the impact rather than thinking it would be applied as it is.

That said, when a patch needs to modify a large amount of code and when that's worth
it (not saying it is the case in the current thread) we could think of an approach
like modifying 20 files per patch and applying, say the 10 patches at a frequency
of one per month.

I think that most of the time those patches are mainly about refactoring to improve
the code so I don't think that's an issue if it takes a year or so to have all the
sub-patches applied.

We could discuss the approach more in depth if another use case shows up (the
approach would probably also depend of the use case).

Regards,

--
Bertrand Drouvot
PostgreSQL Contributors Team
RDS Open Source Databases
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com