Re: CLUSTER and synchronized scans and pg_dump et al
От | Guillaume Smet |
---|---|
Тема | Re: CLUSTER and synchronized scans and pg_dump et al |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1d4e0c10801280633r130df565h8861831c3ebff900@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: CLUSTER and synchronized scans and pg_dump et al ("Florian G. Pflug" <fgp@phlo.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: CLUSTER and synchronized scans and pg_dump et al
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi Florian, Glad to see you back! On Jan 28, 2008 3:25 PM, Florian G. Pflug <fgp@phlo.org> wrote: > How about enable_syncscan, or enable_seqscan_sync? It's not strictly > something the influences the planner, but maybe it's similar enough to > justify a similar naming? It was my first idea but I didn't propose it as it's really a different thing IMHO. enable_* variables don't change the way PostgreSQL really does the job as synchronize_scans (or whatever the name will be) does. And it's not very consistent with the other GUC variables (most of them could have "enable" in their name) but we limited the usage of enable_* to planner variables. I don't know if it's on purpose though. -- Guillaume
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: