> ...
> > At the very least I'd like to see some information demonstrating
> > how much benefit there is to this proposed patch, before we
> > consider whether to adopt it. If there's a significant performance
> > benefit to splitting a PG database along the table-vs-index divide,
> > then it's interesting as a short-term improvement ... but Jim didn't
> > even make that assertion, let alone provide evidence to back it up.
>
> Clearly there can be a *storage management* benefit to having control
> over what gets put where, so this does not need to be justified strictly
> on a performance basis.
>
> For features like this, we will feel free to evolve them or
> revolutionize them with further development, so I'm not worried about
> the backward compatibility issue for cases like this.
>
> Comments?
Agreed.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
