* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote: > You know, I hadn't been taking that option terribly seriously, but > maybe we ought to reconsider it. It would certainly be simpler, and > as you point out, it's not really any worse from an MVCC point of view > than anything else we do. Moreover, it would make this available to > clients like pg_dump without further hackery.
I really don't agree with this notion that the behavior of TRUNCATE, a
top-level, seperately permissioned command, makes it OK to introduce
other busted behavior in existing commands.
> I think the current behavior, where we treat FREEZE as a hint, is just
> awful.
I agree that it's pretty grotty, but I had assumed it was at least
deterministic, ala TRUNCATE/COPY and WAL... If it isn't, then this
certainly gets really ugly really quickly.
I don't think that means we should go ahead and try to always optimize
it though- even when it isn't explicit, there will be an expectation
that it's going to work when all the 'right' conditions are met. I know
that's certainly how I feel about TRUNCATE/COPY and WAL'ing.
Thanks,
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
