| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: PG 10 release notes |
| Date: | 2017-04-25 03:29:42 |
| Message-ID: | 20170425032942.GF7513@momjian.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 11:05:41PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > I think the above commit needs a separate mention, as this is a really
> > huge step forward to control the size of hash indexes.
>
> Yes, it is unfotunate that the item is in the incompatibility item. I
> wonder if I should split out the need to rebuild the hash indexes and
> keep it there and move this item into the "Index" section.
Done, items split.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+ Ancient Roman grave inscription +
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2017-04-25 03:30:45 | Re: PG 10 release notes |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2017-04-25 03:08:34 | Re: PG 10 release notes |