Gregory Stark wrote:
> "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes:
>
>>>> On 2/27/07, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote:
>>>>> I see no reason to implement it if there is no performance gain.
>
>> However, I strongly concur that we need at least some evidence. It could
>> easily be that a misstep in the code, causes a loop over the wrong set
>> and all the performance we thought we would get is invalid, not because
>> of theory or what should happen, but because of actual implementation.
>
> It rather sounds like you're asking for a proof that Simon can write bug-free
> code before you allow him to write any code.
Well wouldn't that be great! :) but no, not quite. I would just like to
see some metrics showing that it is a benefit. Besides the patch needs
to work for the metrics to be run.
Joshua D. Drake
>
>
--
=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/
