On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 4:01 AM, Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >> Aren't you interested in the significance of the patch, and the test case? > > Not particularly in the specifics to be honest. The tradeoffs of the > techniques you used in there seem prohibitive to me. It's easy to make > individual cases faster by sacrificing others.
You're the one poring over the specifics of what I've done, to my consternation. I am not prepared to defend the patch at that level, as I've made abundantly clear. I've called it a sketch, a proof of concept half a dozen times already. I don't understand your difficulty with that. I also don't understand how you can be so dismissive of the benchmark, given the numbers involved. You're being unreasonable. If I didn't write this patch, and I talked to people about this issue at pgCon, I'm not sure that anyone would be convinced that it was a problem, or at least that it was this much of a problem. -- Peter Geoghegan -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
