> ...
> > 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 pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610)
853-3000+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026