| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
| Cc: | José Luis Tallón <jltallon(at)adv-solutions(dot)net>, fabriziomello(at)gmail(dot)com, Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Proposal "VACUUM SCHEMA" |
| Date: | 2014-12-22 17:11:07 |
| Message-ID: | 20141222171107.GE1768@alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Alvaro Herrera (alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com) wrote:
> > Overall, this whole line of development seems like bloating the parse
> > tables for little gain.
>
> Still, I see this point also. I do think it'd be really great if we
> could figure out a way to segregate these kinds of DDL / maintenance
> commands from the normal select/insert/update/delete SQL parsing, such
> that we could add more options, etc, to those longer running and less
> frequent commands without impacting parse time for the high-volume
> commands.
We do have a parenthesized options clause in VACUUM. I think adding
this as a clause there would be pretty much free.
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2014-12-22 17:12:12 | Re: Proposal "VACUUM SCHEMA" |
| Previous Message | Stephen Frost | 2014-12-22 17:05:42 | Re: Proposal "VACUUM SCHEMA" |