Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 12:47 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> Moreover this whole business of not treating hint-bit setting as
>> a page-dirtying operation is completely experimental/unproven IMO, so it
>> would be better to keep the patch footprint as small as possible.
> I have some concerns about that proposal, but it might be the right
> way to go. Before we get too far off into the weeds, though, let's
> back up and talk about something more fundamental: this seems to be
> speeding up the first run by 6x at the expense of slowing down many
> subsequent runs by 10-15%. Does that make this whole idea dead on
> arrival?
Well, it reinforces my opinion that it's experimental ;-). But "first
run" of what, exactly? And are you sure you're taking a wholistic view
of the costs/benefits?
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
