Re: Overhauling GUCS - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Overhauling GUCS
Date
Msg-id 9606.1212804041@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Overhauling GUCS  ("Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
"Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes:
> Not surprising really. It is a simple adjustment to make and it also is
> easy to spot when its a problem. However it is not trivial to test for
> (in terms of time and effort). I know 10 is wrong and so do you.

Sure.  But what is right?  I'm afraid to just push it to (say) 100
because of the possibility of O(N^2) behavior in eqjoinsel.  Somebody
needs to do some measurements on somewhat realistic scenarios.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Joshua D. Drake"
Date:
Subject: Re: Overhauling GUCS
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: We have a launch abort ... PG update releases will be delayed