Gregory Stark wrote:
> It's pretty serious what you're suggesting since it means that we'll basically
> never have a real cluster feature. I would sure hope we're missing something
> and there's a way to make this work usefully.
Another approach would be an online CLUSTER command. That means there'll
be a lot of churn when tuples need to be moved back and forth, along
with updating indexes, but it'd take the overhead out of the critical path.
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com