Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: per-tablespace random_page_cost/seq_page_cost

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: per-tablespace random_page_cost/seq_page_cost
Date: 2009-10-27 03:07:01
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> On Tuesday 27 October 2009 00:42:39 Tom Lane wrote:
>> I think a design that is limited to a prespecified set of GUCs is
>> broken by definition.  It'd be better to make it work like

> How should that work if there are conflicting settings in two tablespaces when 
> tables from both are used?

Well, most of the settings that would be sensible for this are used in
cost estimates that are basically per-table or per-index, so I don't
think it's a huge problem in practice.  But I should clarify my comment:
the set of GUCs used this way must not be wired into the catalog
structure.  I think that the code will only pay attention to certain
GUCs that are valid in-context, but we shouldn't have to redesign the
catalog each time we add one.

			regards, tom lane

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Greg StarkDate: 2009-10-27 03:16:56
Subject: Re: Parsing config files in a directory
Previous:From: Greg SmithDate: 2009-10-27 01:55:57
Subject: Re: Parsing config files in a directory

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group