On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 4:42 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: >> FWIW, I don't really buy this argument. I can't see that it's all >> that implausible to think that the user might be able to prognosticate >> a reasonable value for a future TOAST table. > > Well, it still seems to me that such a user is really more interested in > a way to set the default toast fillfactor (or whatever option is under > discussion), ie what he really knows is a reasonable value for *all* > future TOAST tables in his installation.
Maybe, or maybe he knows that this group of tables is typically pretty stable, but this group over here has more frequent updates, so different fillfactors are appropriate... doesn't have to be 100% site-wide. > Otherwise you're arguing that he knows exactly what the fillfactor > should be for a specific toast table and not any other one ... except > he doesn't know when that toast table is going to be created, which > calls into question the quality of his judgment about its specific > behavior otherwise. Sure, but I think you're putting too much emphasis on the likely quality of the user's judgment. It's not really the place of the database to ignore user requests, even if they're likely stupid requests. WARNING: Type varchar(9) is likely inadequate for assumed purpose of column `telephone_number'. ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
