| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
|---|
| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | contrib/pg_freespacemap |
| Date: | 2009-08-07 22:05:31 |
| Message-ID: | 20090807220531.GK5290@alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
Is there any reason we didn't move the pg_freespace function from
contrib to core?
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: contrib/pg_freespacemap |
| Date: | 2009-08-07 22:08:50 |
| Message-ID: | 773.1249682930@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> Is there any reason we didn't move the pg_freespace function from
> contrib to core?
Is there a reason we *should* move it? The current definition doesn't
leave me feeling that it's more than a low-level hacker's tool.
regards, tom lane
| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: contrib/pg_freespacemap |
| Date: | 2009-08-08 17:50:17 |
| Message-ID: | 20090808175017.GB6394@alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> > Is there any reason we didn't move the pg_freespace function from
> > contrib to core?
>
> Is there a reason we *should* move it? The current definition doesn't
> leave me feeling that it's more than a low-level hacker's tool.
No specific reason. I was just wondering because I saw an old message
about it. Maybe we just don't need it.
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
| From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: contrib/pg_freespacemap |
| Date: | 2009-08-08 19:55:28 |
| Message-ID: | 4A7DD830.8000408@agliodbs.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 8/8/09 10:50 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
>>> Is there any reason we didn't move the pg_freespace function from
>>> contrib to core?
>> Is there a reason we *should* move it? The current definition doesn't
>> leave me feeling that it's more than a low-level hacker's tool.
>
> No specific reason. I was just wondering because I saw an old message
> about it. Maybe we just don't need it.
Given that the FSM is now auto-managing, is there any reason to have
this tool at all?
Seems like it should get killed off.
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
www.pgexperts.com
| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: contrib/pg_freespacemap |
| Date: | 2009-08-08 20:00:26 |
| Message-ID: | 28241.1249761626@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
> Given that the FSM is now auto-managing, is there any reason to have
> this tool at all?
Maybe not, but I'd be inclined to wait a release or so until we have
more field experience with the new FSM. If, in a year, FSM is something
nobody worries about anymore, we can kill the contrib module.
regards, tom lane
| From: | decibel <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: contrib/pg_freespacemap |
| Date: | 2009-08-14 11:20:51 |
| Message-ID: | 0EDD85F7-8B42-4A63-86F0-70A6E3AB3521@decibel.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Aug 8, 2009, at 2:55 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
> On 8/8/09 10:50 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
>>>> Is there any reason we didn't move the pg_freespace function from
>>>> contrib to core?
>>> Is there a reason we *should* move it? The current definition
>>> doesn't
>>> leave me feeling that it's more than a low-level hacker's tool.
>>
>> No specific reason. I was just wondering because I saw an old
>> message
>> about it. Maybe we just don't need it.
>
> Given that the FSM is now auto-managing, is there any reason to have
> this tool at all?
>
> Seems like it should get killed off.
I believe it's useful when dealing with very bloated relations. If
someone's looking for an itch to scratch, ways to more effectively
shrink bloated relations would be good.
--
Decibel!, aka Jim C. Nasby, Database Architect decibel(at)decibel(dot)org
Give your computer some brain candy! www.distributed.net Team #1828