| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Turning off HOT/Cleanup sometimes |
| Date: | 2015-03-12 20:38:12 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZKbsSzCwdO1Ab2EvFNq-NtoomLVCz8XP5Q-ZqcyYrr_g@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 3:48 PM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
> On 3/12/15 5:41 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
>> On 2015-03-11 20:55:18 -0400, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>>> I don't think so. Andres basically wanted a nontrival algorithm to
>>> determine how much pruning to do during a read-only scan. And Robert
>>> basically said, that's not really possible.
>>
>> I don't think either of us made really strong statements.
>
> I didn't mean to put words in your mouth. I just wanted to summarize
> the thread as, Andres wanted more fine-tuning on the behavior, Robert
> expressed serious doubts that that will lead to an acceptable result.
Or to put that another way, I'm not sure there's one behavior here
that will please everybody.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kevin Grittner | 2015-03-12 20:56:08 | Re: Reduce pinning in btree indexes |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2015-03-12 20:07:33 | Re: OOM-killer issue when updating a inheritance table which has large number of child tables |