> On Sun, 23 Aug 1998, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > Yes, I guess you could have both. I just think the normal user is going
> > to prefer the span stuff better, but you have a good point. If we had
> > one, we could buy time getting the other.
>
> For whomever is implementing the row-span stuff, can something be
> added that keeps track of number of rows that are spanned? ie. if most of
> the rows are spanning the rows, then I would personally like to know that
> so that I can look at dumping and reloading the data with a database set
> to a higher blocksize...
>
> There *has* to be some overhead, performance wise, in the database
> having to keep track of row-spanning, and being able to reduce that, IMHO,
> is what I see being able to change the blocksize as doing...
Makes sense, though vacuum would presumably make all the blocks
contigious.
--
Bruce Momjian | 830 Blythe Avenue
maillist@candle.pha.pa.us | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
+ If your life is a hard drive, | (610) 353-9879(w)
+ Christ can be your backup. | (610) 853-3000(h)
