2010/9/8 Hans-Jürgen Schönig <postg...@cybertec.at>: > On Sep 8, 2010, at 4:57 PM, Stephen Frost wrote: > >> * Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote: >>> Neat. Have you checked what effect this has on memory consumption? >>> >>> Also, don't forget to add it to >>> https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/commitfest_view/open >> >> Would be good to have the patch updated to be against HEAD before >> posting to the commitfest. > > > we will definitely provide something which is for HEAD. > but, it seems the problem we are looking is not sufficiently fixed yet. > in our case we shaved off some 18% of planning time or so - looking at the > other top 2 functions i got the feeling that more can be done to reduce this. > i guess we have to attack this as well.
Just remember that four small patches (say) are apt to get committed faster than one big one. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
