| From: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Improving the performance of psql tab completion |
| Date: | 2012-10-10 14:02:53 |
| Message-ID: | CAFj8pRDTZMH0r4c6cNGXD_LGsPBUwa0GgoxMJ+YcRMQOqLm4gQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
2012/10/10 Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>:
> On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 8:45 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>>> ...but isn't pg_table_is_visible overkill for tab completion?
>>
>> How much does this help?
>>
>> update pg_proc set procost = 10 where proname = 'pg_table_is_visible';
>
> hm, it fixes the problem. Also, at least for 9.2, the procost is
> still set at one (just looked). Well, thanks!
can we increase this value in 9.3. I though so default 10 is from 9.0,
but it is 1 still.
Regards
Pavel
>
> merlin
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Hannu Krosing | 2012-10-10 14:06:47 | Re: Is there a good reason why PL languages do not support cstring type arguments and return values ? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2012-10-10 13:58:19 | Re: Is there a good reason why PL languages do not support cstring type arguments and return values ? |