On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 9:38 PM, Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki.takah...@oss.ntt.co.jp> wrote: > > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.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).
Well, that's an indication that you've chosen too small a piece. But I don't really believe that a change that affects only core EXPLAIN and auto_explain is too small a piece to be independently useful. If it is, the whole feature is probably badly conceived in the first place... ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
