| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Using quicksort for every external sort run |
| Date: | 2015-11-20 20:50:08 |
| Message-ID: | CA+Tgmoaj5EMPffZNj_nL6hpFG_GtJyYnTU05JExtpDb56qYmFg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 5:42 PM, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> wrote:
> I would like more opinions on the multipass_warning message. I can
> write a patch that creates a new system view, detailing how sort were
> completed, if there is demand.
I think a warning message is a terrible idea, and a system view is a
needless complication. If the patch is as fast or faster than what we
have now in all cases, then we should adopt it (assuming it's also
correct and well-commented and all that other good stuff). If it's
not, then we need to analyze the cases where it's slower and decide
whether they are significant enough to care about.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2015-11-20 20:52:17 | Re: Using quicksort for every external sort run |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2015-11-20 20:46:19 | Re: [PROPOSAL] VACUUM Progress Checker. |