| From: | Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Kohei KaiGai <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, Kohei(dot)Kaigai(at)emea(dot)nec(dot)com, thom(at)linux(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us |
| Subject: | Re: [v9.2] Fix Leaky View Problem |
| Date: | 2011-10-11 00:04:43 |
| Message-ID: | 20111011000443.GD30402@tornado.leadboat.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Oct 09, 2011 at 05:50:52PM +0200, Kohei KaiGai wrote:
> [patch v4]
Each revision of this patch yielded a 1.2 MiB email. Please gzip attachments
this large. The two revisions you sent in September constituted 18% of the
pgsql-hackers bits for the month, and the next-largest message was only 315
KiB. Your mailer also picks base64 for textual attachments, needlessly
inflating them by 37%.
At the same time, the patch is large because it rewrites every line in
pg_proc.h. Especially since it leaves proleakproof = 'f' for _all_ rows,
consider instead using an approach like this:
http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/20110611211304.GB21098@tornado.leadboat.com
These patches were not context diffs.
Thanks,
nm
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2011-10-11 00:19:32 | Re: [v9.2] Fix Leaky View Problem |
| Previous Message | Kevin Grittner | 2011-10-10 22:31:34 | Re: Overhead cost of Serializable Snapshot Isolation |