Tom Lane wrote:
> We're certainly not putting any such thing into 8.1.*. The proposed
> patch for 8.2 is stalled ATM because of the problem of not having a
> predictable size for the per-partition hash tables. Fixed-size shared
> memory is a harsh mistress :-(
Fair enough :)
Just wanted to ascertain that it was still a going concern - I have full
confidence that you'll have a brainwave one morning as to the perfect
solution =)
gdh
