Re: Further open item (Was: Status of 7.2)
От | Peter Eisentraut |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Further open item (Was: Status of 7.2) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | Pine.LNX.4.30.0111161710190.644-100000@peter.localdomain обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Further open item (Was: Status of 7.2) ("Tille, Andreas" <TilleA@rki.de>) |
Ответы |
Re: Further open item (Was: Status of 7.2)
Re: Further open item (Was: Status of 7.2) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tille, Andreas writes: > > Sorry, I´m really unable to send patches but I have a feature request > > which was addressed in the thread "Serious performance problem" on this > > list. It mainly concerns the performance increase if there would be > > an index scan method which doesn´t have to check the validity of data > > in the table. > I just want to know now if this is an issue for PostgreSQL hackers: > > [ ] yes > [ ] no > [ ] we are discussing about that We are always willing to discuss changes that improve performance, reliability, standards compliance, etc. However, "MS SQL does it, and MS SQL is fast" is not sufficient proof that a feature would improve average performance in PostgreSQL. This issue has been brought up with similarly unsatisfactory arguments in the past, so you should be able to find out about the discussion in the archives. Some of the arguments against this change were bigger indexes, slower write operations, non-existent proof that it's really faster, putting the index on a different disk will mostly obsolete the issue. Consequently, this is currently not something that has got a chance to be implemented anytime soon. -- Peter Eisentraut peter_e@gmx.net
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: