AW: AW: AW: Call for alpha testing: planner statistics revi sion s

From: Zeugswetter Andreas SB <ZeugswetterA(at)wien(dot)spardat(dot)at>
To: "'Tom Lane'" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: AW: AW: AW: Call for alpha testing: planner statistics revi sion s
Date: 2001-06-18 15:49:43
Message-ID: 11C1E6749A55D411A9670001FA687963368331@sdexcsrv1.f000.d0188.sd.spardat.at
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


> > The point is, that if the combined effort of all "hackers" (with the
> > help of some large scale users) cannot come to a more or less
> > generally adequate answer, the field dba most certainly won't eighter.
>
> True, but I regard your "if" as unproven. The reason for this call for
> alpha testing is to find out whether we have a good enough solution or
> not. I feel no compulsion to assume that it's not good enough on the
> basis of no evidence.

Yes, sure, sorry. I certainly don't mean to be offensive. I am just
very interested in this area, and the reasoning behind your decisions.
Time to start reading all your code comments, and doing test cases :-)

Andreas

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2001-06-18 16:24:36 Re: UNIQUE INDEX unaware of transactions (a spin ofquestion)
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2001-06-18 15:47:34 Re: Doc translation