| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Cc: | Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Ian Lawrence Barwick <barwick(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [doc] remove reference to pg_dump pre-8.1 switch behaviour |
| Date: | 2020-11-30 20:46:19 |
| Message-ID: | 1306038.1606769179@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> writes:
> So this comes down to 5 items, as per the attached. Thoughts?
These items look fine to me, except this bit seems a bit awkward:
+ Note that the delayed indexing technique used for <acronym>GIN</acronym>
+ (see <xref linkend="gin-fast-update"/> for details) makes this advice
+ less necessary, but for very large updates it may still be best to
+ drop and recreate the index.
Less necessary than what? Maybe instead write
When fastupdate is enabled (see ...), the penalty is much less than
when it is not. But for very large updates it may still be best to
drop and recreate the index.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alexander Korotkov | 2020-11-30 20:46:44 | Re: Improving spin-lock implementation on ARM. |
| Previous Message | Alexander Korotkov | 2020-11-30 20:39:24 | Re: range_agg |