From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Tatsuro Yamada <tatsuro.yamada.tf@nttcom.co.jp>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: progress report for ANALYZE
Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2019 18:12:17 -0400
Message-ID: <20190709221217.GA16854@alvherre.pgsql> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+Tgmob_YTDVU=Z9CmQj6uP6hcuY77Bs1YFT+fy0Ayc6_Qzn1Q@mail.gmail.com>
On 2019-Jul-08, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 2:18 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> > Yeah, I got the impression that that was determined to be the desirable
> > behavior, so I made it do that, but I'm not really happy about it
> > either. We're not too late to change the CREATE INDEX behavior, but
> > let's discuss what is it that we want.
>
> I don't think I intended to make any such determination -- which
> commit do you think established this as the canonical behavior?
No commit, just discussion in the CREATE INDEX thread.
> I propose that once a field is set, we should leave it set until the end.
Hmm, ok. In CREATE INDEX, we use the block counters multiple times. We
can leave them set until the next time we need them, I suppose.
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: alvherre@2ndquadrant.com, robertmhaas@gmail.com, tatsuro.yamada.tf@nttcom.co.jp, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: progress report for ANALYZE
In-Reply-To: <20190709221217.GA16854@alvherre.pgsql>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox