Re: pg_avd

From: "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>
To: "Neil Conway" <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, "Matthew T(dot) O'Connor" <matthew(at)zeut(dot)net>
Cc: "PostgreSQL Patches" <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_avd
Date: 2003-02-18 08:32:56
Message-ID: 005c01c2d728$56772df0$6500a8c0@fhp.internal
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches

> - separating the logic for ANALYZE and VACUUM seems like a good idea,
> IMHO. For example, INSERT doesn't create any dead tuples, so it
> shouldn't effect the need to VACUUM in any way -- but enough INSERTs

You mean "affect" :) Sorry - just a grammar nazi :)

> As far as where this belongs, I vote against it going into bin/. It
> isn't polished enough, either in concept or in implementation, to
> deserve that kind of endorsement. But I think putting it into contrib/
> for the next release would be a good idea: if people like it, we can
> take a look at seeing what other features / fine-tuning it needs to
> warrant being part of the official package.

True - I change my vote to /contrib :)

Chris

In response to

  • Re: pg_avd at 2003-02-18 08:24:29 from Neil Conway

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Olleg Samoylov 2003-02-18 14:04:19 Re: pg_avd
Previous Message Neil Conway 2003-02-18 08:24:29 Re: pg_avd