| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Josh Kupershmidt <schmiddy(at)gmail(dot)com>, MUHAMMAD ASIF <anaeem(dot)it(at)hotmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: vacuumlo issue |
| Date: | 2012-03-20 21:10:44 |
| Message-ID: | 1827.1332277844@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 11:50 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> I see that patch has not made it to any released versions yet.
>> Is it too late to rethink the design? I propose (a) redefining it
>> as committing after every N objects, and (b) having a limit of 1000
>> or so objects by default.
> I'll dispute the characterization of "utterly brain-dead"; it's better
> than what we had before, which was nothing. However, I think your
> proposal might be better still.
Not hearing any objections, I will go make that happen.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Neil Conway | 2012-03-20 21:12:45 | Re: Gsoc2012 Idea --- Social Network database schema |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2012-03-20 21:06:45 | Re: Memory usage during sorting |