| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(dot)dunstan(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: WARM and indirect indexes |
| Date: | 2017-01-11 13:28:28 |
| Message-ID: | 707baeb4-fd91-618d-e242-d8b74c3b3d96@2ndQuadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 01/10/2017 09:25 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> I am not saying we shouldn't do it, but I am afraid that the complexity
> in figuring out when to use indirect indexes, combined with the number
> of users who will try them, really hurts its inclusion.
>
I think you're making this out to be far more complex than it really is.
You could argue the same about a great many features. Both of these
features have upsides and downsides.
Obviously we need to get some benchmarks to we can quantify the effects,
but this complexity argument doesn't convince me at all. After all,
nobody has to use indirect indexes.
--
Andrew Dunstan https://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Craig Ringer | 2017-01-11 13:42:40 | Re: proposal: session server side variables |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2017-01-11 13:02:53 | Re: Proposal for changes to recovery.conf API |