Re: Loss of cluster status - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Loss of cluster status
Date
Msg-id 21190.1046054013@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Loss of cluster status  ("Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au>)
List pgsql-hackers
"Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au> writes:
>> A CLUSTER command issued just after table creation, while it's still
>> empty, would be cheap ... but we don't put the index in place until
>> we've loaded the data, do we?  Darn.

> Maybe we should issue it after the CREATE INDEX and ADD CONSTRAINT has
> occurred and just bite it.

The real problem I think is that we've confused the notion of setting a
policy for CLUSTER (ie, marking the preferred thing to cluster on) with
the notion of actually doing a CLUSTER.  Perhaps we need an ALTER
command that says "this is what to cluster on" without actually doing
it.

> Other potential problem - ALTER TABLE / SET STORAGE ?

Yeah, pg_dump should be dumping that too, probably.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Christopher Kings-Lynne"
Date:
Subject: Re: Loss of cluster status
Next
From: "Christopher Kings-Lynne"
Date:
Subject: Re: Loss of cluster status