On Fri, Nov 1, 2024 at 12:23 PM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote:
> Having "marked by this operation" twice seems to be redundant. How
> about something like the output below?
>
> visibility map: %u pages set all-visible (%u pages total), %u pages
> set all-frozen (%u pages total)
For me, the meaning of that isn't clear.
I think this is the wrong direction, anyway. If someone says "hey, we
should add X to the output" and someone else says "we should add Y
instead," it doesn't follow that the right thing to do is to add both.
I happen to think that the right answer is X, both because X of my
understanding of the purpose of this log message, and also because X
is in the service of Melanie's larger goal and Y is not. But I also
feel like bikeshedding the patch that somebody should have written
instead of reviewing the one they actually wrote is to be avoided. Of
course, sometimes there's no getting around the fact that the person
chose to do something that didn't really make sense, and then it's
reasonable to suggest alternatives. But here, what was actually done
does make sense and is the first choice of some people. What is
proposed can be added now, provided that it actually gets some review,
and the other thing can be added later if someone wants to do the work
and if no problems are discovered, but it isn't Melanie's job to add
data that isn't needed for her project.
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
