| From: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Alexander Korotkov <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: 64-bit queryId? |
| Date: | 2017-10-02 13:26:13 |
| Message-ID: | CABUevEzE13vvweyHi3+86Gg0qJcwgCfKFNHRAyrSWd2rkxrW1Q@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 1:22 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 1, 2017 at 3:48 PM, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu> wrote:
> > Well these kinds of monitoring systems tend to be used by operations
> > people who are a lot more practical and a lot less worried about
> > theoretical concerns like that.
>
> +1, well said.
>
+1 as well. I think these people would be perfectly find by it changing
across a version upgrade as long as they know that's the deal. *Most* of
the time there is no version upgrade going on, so it would work fine that
time.
Most operations people already deal with a lot of such parameters changing
around. I'm sure most of them would be more than happy with an improvement,
even if it's not mathematically perfect.
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: https://www.hagander.net/ <http://www.hagander.net/>
Work: https://www.redpill-linpro.com/ <http://www.redpill-linpro.com/>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David E. Wheeler | 2017-10-02 14:01:43 | Re: Fwd: Have a problem with citext |
| Previous Message | Shubham Barai | 2017-10-02 13:12:30 | Re: GSoC 2017 : Patch for predicate locking in Gist index |