Re: Commits 8de72b and 5457a1 (COPY FREEZE) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Stephen Frost
Subject Re: Commits 8de72b and 5457a1 (COPY FREEZE)
Date
Msg-id 20121206170253.GU5162@tamriel.snowman.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Commits 8de72b and 5457a1 (COPY FREEZE)  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>)
Responses Re: Commits 8de72b and 5457a1 (COPY FREEZE)  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
* Simon Riggs (simon@2ndQuadrant.com) wrote:
> It's not a bug. Requesting a useful, but not critical optimisation is
> just a hint. The preconditions are not easy to understand, so I see no
> reason to punish people that misunderstand, or cause programs to fail
> in ways that need detailed understanding to make them work again.

I tend to agree with Andres on this one.  This feels a bit like
accepting a command but then not actually following-through on it
if it turns out we can't actually do it.  If it's truely an optimization
(and I suspect my other email/question might provide insight into that),
then it should be something we can 'just do' without needing to be asked
to do it, along the same lines of not WAL'ing when the appropriate
conditions are met (table created in this transaction, etc, etc).
Thanks,
    Stephen

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Stephen Frost
Date:
Subject: Re: Commits 8de72b and 5457a1 (COPY FREEZE)
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Functional dependency in GROUP BY through JOINs