Re: per table random-page-cost?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: marcin mank <marcin(dot)mank(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: per table random-page-cost?
Date: 2009-10-19 22:33:35
Message-ID: 12816.1255991615@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

marcin mank <marcin(dot)mank(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> I thought about making it per-table, but realistically I think most
> people don`t use tablespaces now. I would not want to be telling
> people "to be able to hint the planner to (not) index-scan the table,
> You must move it to a separate tablespace".

Per-table is not physically sensible. Per-tablespace has some rationale
to it.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Gierth 2009-10-19 22:38:36 Re: LATERAL
Previous Message Tom Lane 2009-10-19 22:26:14 Re: LATERAL