| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Remaining beta blockers |
| Date: | 2013-05-03 16:34:57 |
| Message-ID: | 20130503163457.GE10957@alap2.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2013-05-03 12:10:14 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> writes:
> > I'm more concerned about moving information which really should be in
> > the system catalogs out into magic files on disk..
>
> Right. The whole thing is just a kluge, which I'm convinced we'll
> regret sooner or later --- probably sooner.
I tentatively agree as well. The only argument for introducing some
additional location for such information is that it would be the start
of an infrastructure for information we would need for incrementally
adding checksums, page upgrades and such.
> I would much rather drop
> unlogged matviews for now and put scannability status into pg_class
> where it belongs.
I have no problem with that. And getting to the point were we can switch
databases in a backend in at least a restricted environment is a good
thing.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2013-05-03 16:45:36 | Re: Remaining beta blockers |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2013-05-03 16:34:26 | Re: matview niceties: pick any two of these three |