Hello Robert,
>> Given the experience with pgbench and the psql context, I do not think that
>> it would really need to go beyond step 2 above, but I agree that I may be
>> wrong and it is best to be prepared for that from the start. Given the
>> complexity and effort involved with (5), it seems wise to wait for a clearer
>> motivation with actual use-cases before going that far.
>
> Well, my vote would be to go all the way to #5 in one commit.
> Stopping short of that doesn't seem to me to save enough work to make
> much sense. I don't think we're talking about anything all that
> complex, and it will make future improvements a lot simpler.
First, my experience as a basic patch submitter is that any patch which
does more than one thing at a time, even somehow closely related changes,
is asked to be split into distinct sub-patches, and is harder to get
through.
Second, requiring more advanced features is a recipee for getting nothing
in the end, because even if not "that complex" it requires significant
more time to develop. The first step I outlined is enough to handle the
submitted use case and is compatible with grand plans which would change
significantly psql, so seems a reasonnable intermediate target.
Your experience as an seasoned core developer and a committer is probably
different:-)
--
Fabien.
