Gokulakannan Somasundaram wrote: > While we accept that visibility map is good for read only application, why > can't we make it optional? Atleast if there is a way for a person to drop > the visibility map for a table(if it gets created by default), the > application need not incur the overhead for those tables, when it knows it > is update intensive / with batch jobs.
If you have a scenario where the visibility map incurs a measurable overhead, let's hear it. I didn't see any in the tests I performed, but it's certainly possible that if the circumstances are just right it makes a difference. > Again not to deviate from my initial question, can we make a decision > regarding unstable/mutable functions / broken data types ? *Sigh*. Yes. You need to deal with them. -- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
