Hi, On 2016-05-04 13:35:02 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Honestly, I don't see any strong ground in which to base a revert threat > for this feature.
It's datastructures are badly designed. But releasing it there's no pressure to fix that. If this were an intrinsic cost - ok. But it's not. > It doesn't scale as well as we would like in the case > where a high-level is fully stressed with a read-only load -- okay. But > that's unlikely to be a case where this feature is put to work. It'll be just the same in a read mostly workload, which is part of the case for this feature. > So I think accepting the promise that this feature would be improved > in a future release to better support that case is good enough. I've not heard any such promise. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers