| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Cédric Villemain <cedric(dot)villemain(dot)debian(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [WIP] cache estimates, cache access cost |
| Date: | 2011-06-14 21:17:25 |
| Message-ID: | 1308086222-sup-6394@alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Excerpts from Cédric Villemain's message of mar jun 14 17:10:20 -0400 2011:
> If we can have ALTER TABLE running on heavy workload, why not.
> I am bit scared by the effect of such reloption, it focus on HINT
> oriented strategy when I would like to allow a dynamic strategy from
> the server. This work is not done and may not work, so a reloption is
> good at least as a backup (and is more in the idea suggested by Tom
> and others)
Hmm, sounds like yet another use case for pg_class_nt. Why do these
keep popping up?
--
Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jaime Casanova | 2011-06-14 21:41:00 | Re: creating CHECK constraints as NOT VALID |
| Previous Message | Robert Creager | 2011-06-14 21:16:17 | Re: [Pgbuildfarm-members] [HACKERS] Polecat "quit unexpectdly" |