On Wed, Nov 27, 2024 at 02:44:01PM +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> If you want to avoid both the surprise and confusion factor mentioned before,
> maybe what's needed is to *remove* --analyze-in-stages, and replace it with
> --analyze-missing-in-stages and --analyze-all-in-stages (with the clear warning
> about what --analyze-all-in-stages can do to your system if you already have
> statistics).
>
> That goes with the "immediate breakage that you see right away is better than
> silently doing the unexpected where you might not notice the problem until much
> later".
>
> That might trade some of that surprise and confusion for annoyance instead, but
> going forward that might be a clearer path?
Oh, so remove --analyze-in-stages and have it issue a suggestion, and
make two versions --- yeah, that would work too.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> https://momjian.us
EDB https://enterprisedb.com
When a patient asks the doctor, "Am I going to die?", he means
"Am I going to die soon?"
