"Hell, Robert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> You're right - that's just a typo in the subject of the post.
> It's called cursor_tuple_fraction in the submitted patch.
Ah, I hadn't actually read the patch yet ;-). As penance for the noise,
I will do so now.
regards, tom l
On Fri, 2008-05-02 at 16:36 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > OK, if that's the view then the patch is ready for commit, AFAICS.
>
> Use of the plural in the name seems a bit odd to me. Anyone have a
> problem with calling it "cursor_tuple_fraction" instead?
Ag
s; Hell, Robert; pgsql-patches@postgresql.org;
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] GUC parameter cursors_tuple_fraction
Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> OK, if that's the view then the patch is ready for commit, AFAICS.
Use of the plural in the name seems a
Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> OK, if that's the view then the patch is ready for commit, AFAICS.
Use of the plural in the name seems a bit odd to me. Anyone have a
problem with calling it "cursor_tuple_fraction" instead?
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-p
On Fri, 2008-05-02 at 12:01 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> I see this as being basically another cost parameter, and as such
> I don't think it needs more documentation than any of those have.
> (Now admittedly you could argue that they could all use a ton more
> documentation than they now have, but it
On Fri, 2008-05-02 at 12:01 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Heikki Linnakangas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Simon Riggs wrote:
> >> * We've said here http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs.TODO.html that we
> >> "Don't want hints". If that's what we really think, then this patch must
> >> surely be reje
"Heikki Linnakangas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Simon Riggs wrote:
>> * We've said here http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs.TODO.html that we
>> "Don't want hints". If that's what we really think, then this patch must
>> surely be rejected because its a hint... That isn't my view. I *now*
>> thi
