On Tue, 2007-03-06 at 00:54 +0100, Florian G. Pflug wrote: > Simon Riggs wrote:
> But it would break the idea of letting a second seqscan follow in the > first's hot cache trail, no? No, but it would make it somewhat harder to achieve without direct synchronization between scans. It could still work; lets see. I'm not sure thats an argument against fixing the problem with the buffer strategy though. We really want both, not just one or the other. -- Simon Riggs EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
