On Tue, 2007-03-06 at 00:54 +0100, Florian G. Pflug wrote:
> Simon Riggs wrote:

> But it would break the idea of letting a second seqscan follow in the
> first's hot cache trail, no?

No, but it would make it somewhat harder to achieve without direct
synchronization between scans. It could still work; lets see.

I'm not sure thats an argument against fixing the problem with the
buffer strategy though. We really want both, not just one or the other.

  Simon Riggs             
  EnterpriseDB   http://www.enterprisedb.com

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
       subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
       message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

Reply via email to