| 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>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: and it's not a bunny rabbit, either |
| Date: | 2010-12-29 20:01:10 |
| Message-ID: | 369.1293652870@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 Tom Lane's message of mi dic 29 16:29:45 -0300 2010:
>> In practice I think it would make sense if heap_open accepts all
>> relation types on which you can potentially do either a heapscan or
>> indexscan (offhand those should be the same set of relkinds, I think;
>> so this is the same in effect as Heikki's proposal, but phrased
>> differently). So it would have to start rejecting views, and we'd need
>> to go looking for the consequences of that.
> This seems a very good idea, but I think we shouldn't let it sink the
> current patch.
No, but possibly regularizing what heap_open is defined to do would make
Robert's patch simpler.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2010-12-29 20:11:18 | Re: Anyone for SSDs? |
| Previous Message | David E. Wheeler | 2010-12-29 20:01:09 | Re: Extensions, patch v16 |