| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <munro(at)ip9(dot)org>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: CLUSTER FREEZE |
| Date: | 2013-10-29 14:32:37 |
| Message-ID: | 20131029143237.GA21284@awork2.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2013-10-25 09:26:29 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > In any case, it's very far from obvious to me that CLUSTER ought
> > to throw away information by default, which is what you're proposing.
>
> I find it odd to referring to this as throwing away information. I
> know that you have a general concern about throwing away XIDs that are
> still needed for forensic purposes, but that is clearly the ONLY
> purpose that those XIDs serve, and the I/O advantages of freezing by
> default could be massive for many of our users. What's going to
> happen in practice is that experienced users will simply recommend
> CLUSTER FREEZE rather than plain CLUSTER, and you won't have the
> forensic information *anyway*.
I think we should just apply your "preserve forensic information when
freezing" patch. Then we're good to go without big arguments ;)
Greetings,
Andres Freund
--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2013-10-29 14:47:58 | Re: logical changeset generation v6.2 |
| Previous Message | Merlin Moncure | 2013-10-29 14:28:40 | Re: Fast insertion indexes: why no developments |