| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Nathan Boley <npboley(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Collect frequency statistics for arrays |
| Date: | 2012-03-01 21:51:38 |
| Message-ID: | 18427.1330638698@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of jue mar 01 12:00:08 -0300 2012:
>> On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 5:43 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> I confess I am nervous about ripping this out. I am pretty sure we
>> will get complaints about it. Performance optimizations that benefit
>> group A at the expense of group B are always iffy, and I'm not sure
>> the case of using an array as a path indicator is as uncommon as you
>> seem to think.
> Maybe we should keep it as an option.
How would we make it optional? There's noplace I can think of to stick
such a knob ...
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Daniel Farina | 2012-03-01 21:57:36 | Re: Re: pg_stat_statements normalisation without invasive changes to the parser (was: Next steps on pg_stat_statements normalisation) |
| Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2012-03-01 21:27:25 | Re: Re: pg_stat_statements normalisation without invasive changes to the parser (was: Next steps on pg_stat_statements normalisation) |