Re: More schema queries
От | Dave Page |
---|---|
Тема | Re: More schema queries |
Дата | |
Msg-id | D85C66DA59BA044EB96AB9683819CF6101508D@dogbert.vale-housing.co.uk обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | More schema queries ("Dave Page" <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
> -----Original Message----- > From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us] > Sent: 18 May 2002 00:01 > To: Dave Page > Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org > Subject: Re: More schema queries > > There was already some discussion about making a variant version of > current_schemas() that would tell you the Whole Truth, > including the implicitly searched schemas. Seems like we'd > better do that; otherwise we'll find people hardwiring > knowledge of these implicit search rules into their apps, > which is probably a bad idea. > > Anyone have a preference about what to call it? I could see > making a version of current_schemas() that takes a boolean > parameter, or we could choose another function name for the > implicit-schemas-too version. Use of a parameter seems fine to me. Save having Yet Another Function :-) and trying to figure out a sensible name for it! > >> Curious. I have not noticed much of any change in postmaster > >> startup time on Unix. Can you run a profile or something to > >> see where the time is going? > > > Probably, but I'd need hand-holding as I don't have a clue > how to do > > that. > > I'm not sure how to do it on Cygwin, either. On Unix you'd > build a profilable backend executable using > cd pgsql/src/backend > gmake clean > gmake PROFILE="-pg" all > install same, run it, and then use gprof on the gmon.out file > dumped at postmaster termination. Dunno if it has to be done > differently on Cygwin. Well, I have gcc & gprof so I assume it'll be pretty much the same. I'll have a play tonight. Thanks Tom, Dave.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: