Re: CLUSTER FREEZE

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <munro(at)ip9(dot)org>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: CLUSTER FREEZE
Date: 2013-10-25 02:19:40
Message-ID: 12191.1382667580@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> I wonder if we should go so far as to make this the default behavior,
> instead of just making it an option.

In that case you'd have to invent a NOFREEZE keyword, no? Ick.

In any case, it's very far from obvious to me that CLUSTER ought
to throw away information by default, which is what you're proposing.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2013-10-25 02:44:57 Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Move rmtree() from libpgport to libpgcommon
Previous Message Sawada Masahiko 2013-10-25 02:14:18 Re: Patch for fail-back without fresh backup