| From: | Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, 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: | 2013-11-18 20:16:15 |
| Message-ID: | 1384805775.15798.YahooMailNeo@web162902.mail.bf1.yahoo.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:
> On 11/18/2013 08:39 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> If we do add FREEZE, all we would be doing is delaying the time
>> when all CLUSTER operations will use FREEZE, and hence debugging
>> will be just as difficult. My point is that will full
>> knowledge, everyone would use FREEZE unless they expect MVCC
>> bugs, which is going to be an almost zero population.
>
> +1
+1
> None of our users would willingly choose worse performance over
> the 0.1% possibility of needing to analyze a transaction failure.
I assume that's intended to represent the lifetime probability that
a typical user would ever benefit, not per year or per transaction.
Even as a lifetime number, it seems high unless we're specifically
talking about hackers.
--
Kevin Grittner
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2013-11-18 20:21:08 | Re: Changing pg_dump default file format |
| Previous Message | Christophe Pettus | 2013-11-18 20:04:34 | Re: Data corruption issues using streaming replication on 9.0.14/9.2.5/9.3.1 |