Re: [HACKERS] Hash Functions
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Hash Functions |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+Tgmoby3DYuk+AwqBDvEUGQpRYUSrKD9+dDyT1ZDWbW8+jRZw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Hash Functions (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] Hash Functions
Re: [HACKERS] Hash Functions |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 1:12 PM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote: > Given that a lot of data types have a architecture dependent representation, it seems somewhat unrealistic and expensiveto have a hard rule to keep them architecture agnostic. And if that's not guaranteed, then I'm doubtful it makessense as a soft rule either. That's a good point, but the flip side is that, if we don't have such a rule, a pg_dump of a hash-partitioned table on one architecture might fail to restore on another architecture. Today, I believe that, while the actual database cluster is architecture-dependent, a pg_dump is architecture-independent. Is it OK to lose that property? -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: