| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: The case for removing replacement selection sort |
| Date: | 2017-09-27 07:06:22 |
| Message-ID: | CANP8+jJ1Br8yd9MaiuyZE75MdpE4L7ndpfg2Z8H59y0BJOfOjQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 14 July 2017 at 23:20, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> wrote:
> I think we should remove the replacement_sort_tuples GUC, and kill
> replacement selection entirely. There is no need to do this for
> Postgres 10. I don't feel very strongly about it. It just doesn't make
> sense to continue to support replacement selection.
Forgive me if I missed the explanation, but how will we handle bounded sorts?
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2017-09-27 07:07:38 | Re: Surjective functional indexes |
| Previous Message | Ashutosh Bapat | 2017-09-27 07:05:39 | Re: Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers |