From: | Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Postgresql General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | [PATCH] Partial indices final? |
Date: | 2001-07-11 15:14:01 |
Message-ID: | 20010712011401.A3918@svana.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-patches |
OK, I've changed the vacuum code now so your index doesn't get
departialised. The changes seem pretty obvious so they're probably right.
They certainly didn't seem to break my simple tests. How does one test that
VACUUM works properly?
I think it's time to send it to pgsql-patches now, unless someone spots a
serious problem.
http://svana.org/kleptog/pgsql/partial-indices-7.2.patch
Anyway, now it's time to think about after. I can think of:
* Complete the removal of EXTEND INDEX
* Allow IS NULL in the predicate
Anything else?
--
Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>
http://svana.org/kleptog/
> It would be nice if someone came up with a certification system that
> actually separated those who can barely regurgitate what they crammed over
> the last few weeks from those who command secret ninja networking powers.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tony Grant | 2001-07-11 15:15:31 | Re: [JDBC] JDBC and stored procedures |
Previous Message | Christian Bucanac | 2001-07-11 15:13:20 | RE: Performance tuning for linux, 1GB RAM, dual CPU? |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tony Grant | 2001-07-11 15:15:31 | Re: [JDBC] JDBC and stored procedures |
Previous Message | Dave Cramer | 2001-07-11 14:20:29 | Re: [JDBC] JDBC and stored procedures |