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

Re: per-tablespace random_page_cost/seq_page_cost

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>,Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>,PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: per-tablespace random_page_cost/seq_page_cost
Date: 2009-10-26 23:52:53
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane escribió:
> Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> writes:
> > Still far from convinced on that one. But effective_io_concurrency
> > should be included even in the first pass.
> 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

Well, not exactly like ALTER DATABASE SET because those are now stored
in pg_db_role_setting.  But a new spcoptions column storing an array of
key/value pairs seems a reasonable way to do it.

Alvaro Herrera                      
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Itagaki TakahiroDate: 2009-10-27 00:20:46
Subject: Re: "toast.fillfactor" is documented but not recognized?
Previous:From: Andres FreundDate: 2009-10-26 23:47:56
Subject: Re: per-tablespace random_page_cost/seq_page_cost

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2018 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group