On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 04:42:46PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Bruce Momjian (br...@momjian.us) wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 03:57:15PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > > * Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
> > > > There was also some discussion of fixing the name-check to be indexable,
* Bruce Momjian (br...@momjian.us) wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 03:57:15PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > * Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
> > > There was also some discussion of fixing the name-check to be indexable,
> > > which the substring hack isn't. That would take a bit of work t
On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 03:57:15PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
> > There was also some discussion of fixing the name-check to be indexable,
> > which the substring hack isn't. That would take a bit of work though.
>
> Right. I still want to do it, but it
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
> There was also some discussion of fixing the name-check to be indexable,
> which the substring hack isn't. That would take a bit of work though.
Right. I still want to do it, but it still needs a few more "to-its",
as it were.
Thanks,
Merlin Moncure writes:
> On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 8:45 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> How much does this help?
>>
>> update pg_proc set procost = 10 where proname = 'pg_table_is_visible';
> hm, it fixes the problem. Also, at least for 9.2, the procost is
> still set at one (just looked). Well, thanks!
2012/10/10 Merlin Moncure :
> On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 8:45 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Merlin Moncure writes:
>>> ...but isn't pg_table_is_visible overkill for tab completion?
>>
>> How much does this help?
>>
>> update pg_proc set procost = 10 where proname = 'pg_table_is_visible';
>
> hm, it fixes t
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 8:45 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Merlin Moncure writes:
>> ...but isn't pg_table_is_visible overkill for tab completion?
>
> How much does this help?
>
> update pg_proc set procost = 10 where proname = 'pg_table_is_visible';
hm, it fixes the problem. Also, at least for 9.2, th
Merlin Moncure writes:
> ...but isn't pg_table_is_visible overkill for tab completion?
How much does this help?
update pg_proc set procost = 10 where proname = 'pg_table_is_visible';
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.or
Hackers,
I have a database with 94059 entries in pg_class. Things are mostly
working fine but psql tab completion is frustratingly slow (around 2.5
seconds on this box). I poked around in psql a bit and saw that the
main culprit was the table visibility condition check. Here's a
typical query (t
