Re: per-tablespace random_page_cost/seq_page_cost

Hi,

On Tuesday 27 October 2009 00:42:39 Tom Lane wrote:
> Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu> writes:
> > Still far from convinced on that one. But effective_io_concurrency
> > should be included even in the first pass.
> I think a design that is limited to a prespecified set of GUCs is
> broken by definition.  It'd be better to make it work like
> ALTER DATABASE SET.
How should that work if there are conflicting settings in two tablespaces when 
tables from both are used?
Some settings make sense per tablespace, but I dont see a valid model to 
accept e.g. 'standard_conforming_strings' set to 'off' in one and  'on' in the 
other...

Andres