Re: Need more reviewers!

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com>, josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Need more reviewers!
Date: 2008-09-04 20:06:18
Message-ID: 1220558778.4371.1036.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


On Thu, 2008-09-04 at 14:01 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:

> If anyone is willing to do comparative performance testing, I'll
> volunteer to make up two variant patches that do it both ways and
> are otherwise equivalent.

Why not do both, set via a reloption? We can then set the default to
whichever wins in general testing. There will always be cases where one
or the other is a winner, so having both will be useful.

--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2008-09-04 20:06:23 Re: hash index improving v3
Previous Message Greg Smith 2008-09-04 19:20:05 Re: [patch] GUC source file and line number]