From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "Patrik VV(dot)" <paddor(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Wording in TABLESAMPLE documentation |
Date: | 2016-08-12 17:50:57 |
Message-ID: | CANP8+jK66dJD4+MZk4M1EW0jrUAUVkqrAWnmZfXUXZaCmr4A7w@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-docs |
On 12 August 2016 at 16:23, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
>> But now you mention it, I agree with you. Let's put it back to say
>> "sample" but also explain where that new sample comes from... my
>> attempt to explain this better is in square brackets
>
>> "If REPEATABLE is not given then a new random sample will be taken for
>> each query [based upon the global seed value for the current user.]"
>
> I think "global" might have implications we don't want. How about
> adding ", based on a system-generated seed"?
What I was trying to express was that
SELECT setseed(dp);
SELECT * FROM foo TABLESAMPLE ...;
SELECT * FROM foo TABLESAMPLE ...;
SELECT * FROM foo TABLESAMPLE ...;
would yield a repeatable set of samples, similarly repeatable but not
same samples as
SELECT * FROM foo TABLESAMPLE ... REPEATABLE;
SELECT * FROM foo TABLESAMPLE ... REPEATABLE;
SELECT * FROM foo TABLESAMPLE ... REPEATABLE;
so that people understand there is some predictability even without REPEATABLE.
So I don't understand the "based on a system-generated seed", but
maybe I'm missing information.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2016-08-12 17:54:54 | Re: Wording in TABLESAMPLE documentation |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2016-08-12 15:23:03 | Re: Wording in TABLESAMPLE documentation |