On 2015-04-20 17:13:29 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Didn't you think any of the TODO threads had workable solutions? And
> don't expect adding an additional file per relation will be zero cost
> --- added over the lifetime of 200M transactions, I question if this
> approach would be a win.
Note that normally you'd not run with a 200M transaction freeze max age
on a busy server. Rather around a magnitude more.
Think about this being used on a time partionioned table. Right now all
the partitions have to be fully rescanned on a regular basis - quite
painful. With something like this normally only the newest partitions
will have to be.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
