Re: [WIP] cache estimates, cache access cost

From: "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
To: "Greg Smith" <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: <cedric(dot)villemain(dot)debian(at)gmail(dot)com>,<robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [WIP] cache estimates, cache access cost
Date: 2011-06-20 19:00:43
Message-ID: 4DFF528B020000250003E9EC@gw.wicourts.gov
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:

> The idea that any of this will run automatically is a dream at
> this point, so saying you want to automatically recover from
> problems with the mechanism that doesn't even exist yet is a bit
> premature.

Well, I certainly didn't mean it to be a reason not to move forward
with development -- I wouldn't have raised the issue had you not
said this upthread:

> I don't see how sequential scan vs. index costing will be any
> different on a fresh system than it is now.

All I was saying is: I do; here's how...

Carry on.

-Kevin

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Florian Pflug 2011-06-20 19:15:51 Re: Another issue with invalid XML values
Previous Message Tom Lane 2011-06-20 18:58:21 Re: Range Types and extensions