Thread: Removing "Included attributes in B-tree indexes" section from docs

Removing "Included attributes in B-tree indexes" section from docs

From
Peter Geoghegan
Date:
I propose removing the "Included attributes in B-tree indexes"
top-level section of chapter 63 from the user facing documentation.
Chapter 63 concerns B-Tree operator classes themselves, in the
abstract, so the fact that an operator class isn't needed for extra
covering index columns isn't appropriate. It seems sufficient to only
mention this once, in the CREATE INDEX docs.

Attached patch shows what I have in mind -- the total removal of this
top-level section.

-- 
Peter Geoghegan

Attachment

Re: Removing "Included attributes in B-tree indexes" section fromdocs

From
Alvaro Herrera
Date:
On 2018-Jun-15, Peter Geoghegan wrote:

> I propose removing the "Included attributes in B-tree indexes"
> top-level section of chapter 63 from the user facing documentation.

Hi Peter,

I don't necessarily object to the proposed change, but I think you
should generally wait a bit longer for others to react.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services


Re: Removing "Included attributes in B-tree indexes" section from docs

From
Peter Geoghegan
Date:
On Sat, Jun 16, 2018 at 8:51 PM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> I don't necessarily object to the proposed change, but I think you
> should generally wait a bit longer for others to react.

What wait period do you think is appropriate in this case?

The doc section that I removed was a last minute addition to the
covering index commit, commit 8224de4f, something that I was heavily
involved in as a reviewer. I felt, rightly or wrongly, that I had
discretion to commit within a relatively short period of time (a
little over 24 hours) because of the specific circumstances: I knew
that the doc section was not well considered in the first place, I
thought that the question was clear cut, and I doubted that anyone
else would follow up at all.

-- 
Peter Geoghegan


Re: Removing "Included attributes in B-tree indexes" section from docs

From
Alexander Korotkov
Date:
On Sun, Jun 17, 2018 at 9:33 PM Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie> wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 16, 2018 at 8:51 PM, Alvaro Herrera
> <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> > I don't necessarily object to the proposed change, but I think you
> > should generally wait a bit longer for others to react.
>
> What wait period do you think is appropriate in this case?
>
> The doc section that I removed was a last minute addition to the
> covering index commit, commit 8224de4f, something that I was heavily
> involved in as a reviewer. I felt, rightly or wrongly, that I had
> discretion to commit within a relatively short period of time (a
> little over 24 hours) because of the specific circumstances: I knew
> that the doc section was not well considered in the first place, I
> thought that the question was clear cut, and I doubted that anyone
> else would follow up at all.

FWIW, I've no objections against removing this.

------
Alexander Korotkov
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company


Re: Removing "Included attributes in B-tree indexes" section fromdocs

From
Alvaro Herrera
Date:
On 2018-Jun-17, Peter Geoghegan wrote:

> On Sat, Jun 16, 2018 at 8:51 PM, Alvaro Herrera
> <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> > I don't necessarily object to the proposed change, but I think you
> > should generally wait a bit longer for others to react.
> 
> What wait period do you think is appropriate in this case?

One which includes at least half a working day in a different timezone.
You asked mid-afternoon on a Friday in a timezone pretty far west.  I
think you could find people in their offices in Easter Island, but not
many more.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services


Re: Removing "Included attributes in B-tree indexes" section from docs

From
Peter Geoghegan
Date:
On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 10:21 AM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> One which includes at least half a working day in a different timezone.
> You asked mid-afternoon on a Friday in a timezone pretty far west.

It was 11 am PST.

I'll make a note about this. It won't happen again.

-- 
Peter Geoghegan


Re: Removing "Included attributes in B-tree indexes" section fromdocs

From
Andres Freund
Date:
On 2018-06-18 13:21:43 -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2018-Jun-17, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> 
> > On Sat, Jun 16, 2018 at 8:51 PM, Alvaro Herrera
> > <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> > > I don't necessarily object to the proposed change, but I think you
> > > should generally wait a bit longer for others to react.
> > 
> > What wait period do you think is appropriate in this case?
> 
> One which includes at least half a working day in a different timezone.
> You asked mid-afternoon on a Friday in a timezone pretty far west.  I
> think you could find people in their offices in Easter Island, but not
> many more.

I think there's also a question of how much a patch is blocking you /
others.  A shorter question period is more understandable if it's step
3/40, rather than 1/1...

Greetings,

Andres Freund


Re: Removing "Included attributes in B-tree indexes" section from docs

From
Robert Haas
Date:
On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 1:31 PM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> I think there's also a question of how much a patch is blocking you /
> others.  A shorter question period is more understandable if it's step
> 3/40, rather than 1/1...

Agreed.  For non-critical stuff like this it seems like waiting 2 or 3
business days is a good idea.

Doesn't sound like there's any actual controversy in this case, though.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company


Re: Removing "Included attributes in B-tree indexes" section fromdocs

From
Andrew Dunstan
Date:

On 06/18/2018 01:31 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2018-06-18 13:21:43 -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> On 2018-Jun-17, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, Jun 16, 2018 at 8:51 PM, Alvaro Herrera
>>> <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>>>> I don't necessarily object to the proposed change, but I think you
>>>> should generally wait a bit longer for others to react.
>>> What wait period do you think is appropriate in this case?
>> One which includes at least half a working day in a different timezone.
>> You asked mid-afternoon on a Friday in a timezone pretty far west.  I
>> think you could find people in their offices in Easter Island, but not
>> many more.
> I think there's also a question of how much a patch is blocking you /
> others.  A shorter question period is more understandable if it's step
> 3/40, rather than 1/1...
>



Yeah, but this would still apply for the first in a series of advertised 
patches.

I usually try to wait at least a couple of days. I'm sure every 
committer understands how you can feel the itch to push. I know I do.

cheers

andrew

-- 
Andrew Dunstan                https://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services