Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: CLUSTER and synchronized scans and pg_dump et al

From: "Guillaume Smet" <guillaume(dot)smet(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Gregory Stark" <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers list" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: CLUSTER and synchronized scans and pg_dump et al
Date: 2008-01-27 18:22:57
Message-ID: 1d4e0c10801271022w56430218pe3cd342e55763686@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Jan 27, 2008 7:14 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> It could be PGC_USERSET, afaics.

If so, it seems like a good idea even if it's just for debugging purposes.

--
Guillaume

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2008-01-27 18:37:29
Subject: Re: CLUSTER and synchronized scans and pg_dump et al
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2008-01-27 18:14:33
Subject: Re: CLUSTER and synchronized scans and pg_dump et al

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group