Encourage people to reach out in #database on Slack for advice on database questions

What does this MR do?

Some feature additions/changes might require complex query additions/changes. Authors might get surprised during their MR database review, as they might have not expected their query to be rejected, or even the whole feature as its being proposed.

By encouraging people to think about database implications earlier in the feature design process, we could be mitigating the risk of authors planning the feature a certain way for a certain milestone, then missing the milestone and/or having to re-work the solution, thus losing a lot of time.

This waste of time can be even greater when a team has already been through UX design, or it's a collaboration between multiple teams.

This MR adds a suggestion in our docs for MR authors to consider asking for a second opinion to their proposals earlier in the feature design process.

The intent of this MR is not to define an SLO for maintainers to support authors in the design phase of feature implementations, but rather to encourage authors to think about database implications, and if needed, ask questions in the #database channel where everyone, not only database maintainers, is encouraged to help each other.

Related issues

Author's checklist

• Optional. Consider taking the GitLab Technical Writing Fundamentals course.
• Follow the:
  • Documentation process.
  • Documentation guidelines.
  • Style Guide.
• If you're adding or changing the main heading of the page (H1), ensure that the product tier badge is added.
• If you are a GitLab team member, request a review based on:
  • The documentation page's metadata.
  • The associated Technical Writer.

If you are a GitLab team member and only adding documentation, do not add any of the following labels:

• ~"frontend"
• ~"backend"
• ~"type::bug"
• ~"database"

These labels cause the MR to be added to code verification QA issues.

Reviewer's checklist

Documentation-related MRs should be reviewed by a Technical Writer for a non-blocking review, based on Documentation Guidelines and the Style Guide.

If you aren't sure which tech writer to ask, use roulette or ask in the #docs Slack channel.

• If the content requires it, ensure the information is reviewed by a subject matter expert.
• Technical writer review items:
  • Ensure docs metadata is present and up-to-date.
  • Ensure the appropriate labels are added to this MR.
  • Ensure a release milestone is set.
  • If relevant to this MR, ensure content topic type principles are in use, including:
    • The headings should be something you'd do a Google search for. Instead of Default behavior, say something like Default behavior when you close an issue.
    • The headings (other than the page title) should be active. Instead of Configuring GDK, say something like Configure GDK.
    • Any task steps should be written as a numbered list.
    • If the content still needs to be edited for topic types, you can create a follow-up issue with the docs-technical-debt label.
• Review by assigned maintainer, who can always request/require the reviews above. Maintainer's review can occur before or after a technical writer review.