| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Qi Huang <huangqiyx(at)hotmail(dot)com>, "neil(dot)conway" <neil(dot)conway(at)gmail(dot)com>, daniel <daniel(at)heroku(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Gsoc2012 Idea --- Social Network database schema |
| Date: | 2012-03-21 15:00:59 |
| Message-ID: | 4F69ED2B.90702@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 03/21/2012 10:47 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Excerpts from Tom Lane's message of mié mar 21 11:35:54 -0300 2012:
>
>> Now that would all be fine if this were a widely-desired feature, but
>> AFAIR the user demand for it has been about nil. So I'm leaning to
>> the position that we don't want it.
> I disagree with there being zero interest ... the "order by random()"
> stuff does come up occasionally.
>
Presumably the reason that's not good enough is that is scans the whole
table (as well as being non-portable)? Maybe we could find some less
invasive way of avoiding that.
cheers
andrew
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2012-03-21 15:01:05 | Re: Patch: add timing of buffer I/O requests |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2012-03-21 14:58:40 | Re: misleading error message from connectMaintenanceDatabase() |