On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 11:51 AM, Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > Multi-table CLUSTER uses multiple transactions, so this should not be an > issue. That said, I don't think there's much point in CLUSTER SCHEMA, > much less TRUNCATE SCHEMA. Do you normally organize your schemas so > that there are some that contain only tables that need to be truncated > together? That would be a strange use case. > > Overall, this whole line of development seems like bloating the parse > tables for little gain.
We added REINDEX SCHEMA less than three weeks ago; if we accept that that was a good change, but think this is a bad one, it's not clear to me that there is any guiding principle here beyond who happened to weigh in on which threads. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
