Re: [HACKERS] pgbench: Skipping the creating primary keys after initialization

From: Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] pgbench: Skipping the creating primary keys after initialization
Date: 2017-11-13 18:51:07
Message-ID: alpine.DEB.2.20.1711131949120.18461@lancre
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


>> Note that if "c" is freed by "d" (drop), then it may be worth considering
>> that "t" (table) could be replaced by "c" (create).
>
> I thought about that, but the argument that 'c' might mean different
> sorts of create steps (e.g. create index) seemed reasonable. I think
> we're best off leaving it as 't' in case of future expansion.

Ok. Fine with me.

--
Fabien.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2017-11-13 18:59:02 Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add hash partitioning.
Previous Message Pavel Stehule 2017-11-13 18:43:14 Re: [HACKERS] pg audit requirements