Re: Freeze avoidance of very large table.

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Sawada Masahiko <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com>, Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Freeze avoidance of very large table.
Date: 2015-08-06 02:57:48
Message-ID: 20150806025748.GL2441@postgresql.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Bruce Momjian wrote:

> This is why I suggested putting the new SQL function where it belongs
> for consistency and then open a separate thread to discuss the future of
> where we want diagnostic functions to be. It is too complicated to talk
> about both issues in the same thread.

Oh come on -- gimme a break. We figure out much more complicated
problems in single threads all the time.

--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2015-08-06 03:18:08 Re: Raising our compiler requirements for 9.6
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2015-08-06 02:55:20 Re: deparsing utility commands