Re: [PATCHES] Proposed patch: synchronized_scanning GUC variable - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [PATCHES] Proposed patch: synchronized_scanning GUC variable
Date
Msg-id 14071.1201713748@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [PATCHES] Proposed patch: synchronized_scanning GUC variable  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: [PATCHES] Proposed patch: synchronized_scanning GUC variable
Re: [PATCHES] Proposed patch: synchronized_scanning GUC variable
List pgsql-hackers
Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> I'm still not very happy with any of the options here.

> BAS is great if you didn't want to trash the cache, but its also
> annoying to people that really did want to load a large table into
> cache. However we set it, we're going to have problems because not
> everybody has the same database.

That argument leads immediately to the conclusion that you need
per-table control over the behavior.  Which maybe you do, but it's
far too late to be proposing it for 8.3.  We should put this whole
area of more-control-over-BAS-and-syncscan on the TODO agenda.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Proposed patch: synchronized_scanning GUCvariable
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Will PostgreSQL get ported to CUDA?