On 11/10/2010 07:51 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> (And no, don't you dare breathe a word about git making that
> all automagically better. I have enough back-patching experience with
> git by now to be unimpressed; in fact, I notice that its rename-tracking
> feature falls over entirely when trying to back-patch further than 8.3.
> Apparently there's some hardwired limit on the number of files it can
> cope with.)
>> That's very sad. Did you file a bug?
> It's intentional behavior. It gives up when there are too many
> differences to avoid being slow.
We should adopt that philosophy. I suggest we limit all tables in future
to 1m rows in the interests of speed.
cheers
andrew
