Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Sat, Jul 31, 2010 at 12:32 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> So it'd definitely be a lot better than now. Maybe there'd be some
>> remaining performance gap for non-pathological cases, but I think we
>> would be willing to pay that in order to avoid bad behavior for the
>> pathological cases. It's difficult to say for sure of course
>> without going to the trouble of coding and testing it.
> Well, it sounds like a reasonable thing to try, then. You going to
> take a crack at it?
Yeah, I'll have at it.
regards, tom lane