From: johnnnnnn <john@phaedrusdeinus.org>
To: Stephan Szabo <sszabo@megazone23.bigpanda.com>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] CLUSTER command
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 16:26:41 -0600
Message-ID: <20021212222641.GA8278@performics.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20021212135913.Q11714-100000@megazone23.bigpanda.com>
References: <3DF90042.E5290B7F@nsd.ca>
<20021212135913.Q11714-100000@megazone23.bigpanda.com>
On Thu, Dec 12, 2002 at 02:03:56PM -0800, Stephan Szabo wrote:
> I'd vote against changing the existing CLUSTER since the existing
> CLUSTER while not great does handle many different key values fairly
> well as well and this solution wouldn't.
I would agree. What's being proposed sounds much more like table
partitioning than clustering.
That's not to say that the existing CLUSTER couldn't be improved, at
the very least to the point where it allows inserts to respect the
clustered structure. That's a post for another thread, though.
-johnnnnnnnnnnn
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-interfaces@postgresql.org
Cc: john@phaedrusdeinus.org, sszabo@megazone23.bigpanda.com, pgsql-performance@postgresql.org, pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] CLUSTER command
In-Reply-To: <20021212222641.GA8278@performics.com>
* 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