On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 3:53 AM, Fabien COELHO <coe...@cri.ensmp.fr> wrote: > My opinion is that the submitted version is simple and fine for the purpose, > and the plan you suggest replaces 5*2 repetitions by a lot of code and > complexity, which is not desirable and should be avoided. > > However, for obvious reasons the committer opinion prevails:-)
You're welcome to solicit other opinions. I'm not unwilling to give way if there's a chorus of support for the way you've done it. But to me it sounds like you're saying that it doesn't really matter whether the system is scalable and maintainable because we only have 5 functions right now, which is a design philosophy with which I just don't agree. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
