| From: | Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Euler Taveira de Oliveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com>, Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Buffer usage in EXPLAIN and pg_stat_statements (review) |
| Date: | 2009-10-15 01:38:53 |
| Message-ID: | 20091015103113.A2C0.52131E4D@oss.ntt.co.jp |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> My (limited) experience is that it's usually better to get something
> incremental committed, even if it's not what you really want. You can
> always take another crack at the remaining issues later, but if the
> whole patch gets shot down then you are out of luck.
Yeah, that makes sense. But the partial change should also be
a "long-term solution" ;-). It is hard to determine whether
the partial change is a good solution until the whole features
works as expected (at least partially).
Regards,
---
ITAGAKI Takahiro
NTT Open Source Software Center
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2009-10-15 01:44:43 | Re: Buffer usage in EXPLAIN and pg_stat_statements (review) |
| Previous Message | KaiGai Kohei | 2009-10-15 01:35:18 | Re: CommitFest 2009-09, two weeks on |