Skip site navigation (1)
Skip section navigation (2)
Peripheral Links
Header And Logo
|
Site Navigation
Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1
- From: Bruno Wolff III <bruno(at)wolff(dot)to>
- To: "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>
- Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
- Subject: Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1
- Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 11:10:11 -0500
- Message-id: <20050429161011(dot)GA8734(at)wolff(dot)to>
On Fri, Apr 29, 2005 at 12:43:37 -0300, "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> wrote: > On Fri, 29 Apr 2005, Bruno Wolff III wrote: > > Except for the surprise of peridically having the system go unresponsive > because it hit a large table, and that new user wondering what is wrong > with postgresql that it just stalls seemingly randomly :( I think most users running systems with that large of tables will know what they are doing. And will be more careful with vacuum. Vacuum running for a long time on large tables with few pages that need updating is really a separate problem that could use its own solution.
- References:
- Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1
- From: Tom Lane
- Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1
- From: Bruce Momjian
- Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1
- From: Bruno Wolff III
- Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1
- From: Marc G. Fournier
- Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1
- Prev by Date: Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1
- Next by Date: Re: pg_restore stuck in a loop?
- Previous by thread: Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1
- Next by thread: Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1
- Indexes: