Re: Vacuum full warning

On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 2:12 PM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 15:11, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 2:09 PM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 15:01, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 1:46 PM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 13:30, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 12:29 PM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 13:22, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I came across yet another case of "i did vacuum full because it seemed
>>>>>>>>> like a good idea" today.. Urgh.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> What do you guys think of a patch like the attached, which throws a
>>>>>>>>> warning when you run vacuum full from the maintenance dialog on a
>>>>>>>>> pre-9.0 version?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Something like that should be a guru hint shouldn't it?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hmm. That might be an idea. I always turn those off because the
>>>>>>> majority of them are just annoying ;)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Where the heck is the *source* for the guru hints stored?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> docs/xxxx/hints.
>>>>>
>>>>> Meh. So why didn't mym "git grep" find that.. *annoyance*.
>>>>>
>>>>> Anyway. Something like this, then? Am I missing something still?
>>>>
>>>> At least a change to the installer source to add the new file. Do we
>>>> need something for Makefile.am as well, or are we using a wildcard
>>>> there?
>>>
>>> Ah, wasn't aware we used the installer from there. But yeah, other
>>> ones are in the wxs file - will go add there.
>>>
>>> Makefile.am appears to be using a wildcard, yes.
>>>
>>> Q: what's our taken on batckpatching something like this to 1.12?
>>
>> Hmm, well it's not really a bug - but it's hard to call it a feature
>> either, and it certainly seems like it might help people avoid
>> expensive mistakes. It's also not at all invasive, so I don't think
>> I'd object.
>
> Hmm. One thing to check: adding a file isn't going to break the
> installer, right? (break == cause annoyance)

I don't think so.



--
Dave Page
Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com
Twitter: @pgsnake

EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company