Re: CLUSTER and synchronized scans and pg_dump et al - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: CLUSTER and synchronized scans and pg_dump et al
Date
Msg-id 26831.1201459049@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: CLUSTER and synchronized scans and pg_dump et al  ("Guillaume Smet" <guillaume.smet@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: CLUSTER and synchronized scans and pg_dump et al
Re: CLUSTER and synchronized scans and pg_dump et al
Re: CLUSTER and synchronized scans and pg_dump et al
List pgsql-hackers
"Guillaume Smet" <guillaume.smet@gmail.com> writes:
>>> Maybe a GUC variable to enable/disable syncscan?

> If so, it seems like a good idea even if it's just for debugging purposes.

Do we have nominations for a name?  The first idea that comes to mind
is "synchronized_scanning" (defaulting to ON).

Also, does anyone object to making pg_dump just disable it
unconditionally?  Greg's original gripe only mentioned the case of
clustered tables, but it'd be kind of a pain to make pg_dump turn it
on and off again for different tables.  And I could see people
complaining about pg_dump failing to preserve row order even in
unclustered tables.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Guillaume Smet"
Date:
Subject: Re: CLUSTER and synchronized scans and pg_dump et al
Next
From: "Guillaume Smet"
Date:
Subject: Re: CLUSTER and synchronized scans and pg_dump et al