|From:||Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>|
|To:||Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>|
|Cc:||Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Ian Lawrence Barwick <barwick(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>|
|Subject:||Re: [doc] remove reference to pg_dump pre-8.1 switch behaviour|
|Views:||Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email|
On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 03:46:19PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> writes:
> > So this comes down to 5 items, as per the attached. Thoughts?
> These items look fine to me, except this bit seems a bit awkward:
> + Note that the delayed indexing technique used for <acronym>GIN</acronym>
> + (see <xref linkend="gin-fast-update"/> for details) makes this advice
> + less necessary, but for very large updates it may still be best to
> + drop and recreate the index.
> Less necessary than what? Maybe instead write
> When fastupdate is enabled (see ...), the penalty is much less than
> when it is not. But for very large updates it may still be best to
> drop and recreate the index.
Thanks, that's indeed better. I used your wording, looked at that
again, and applied that.
|Next Message||Greg Nancarrow||2020-12-01 08:09:10||Re: Libpq support to connect to standby server as priority|
|Previous Message||Fujii Masao||2020-12-01 07:32:20||Re: autovac issue with large number of tables|