On 2013-10-29 11:29:24 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 10:32 AM, Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> > wrote: > > On 2013-10-25 09:26:29 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > >> > In any case, it's very far from obvious to me that CLUSTER ought > >> > to throw away information by default, which is what you're proposing. > >> > >> I find it odd to referring to this as throwing away information. I > >> know that you have a general concern about throwing away XIDs that are > >> still needed for forensic purposes, but that is clearly the ONLY > >> purpose that those XIDs serve, and the I/O advantages of freezing by > >> default could be massive for many of our users. What's going to > >> happen in practice is that experienced users will simply recommend > >> CLUSTER FREEZE rather than plain CLUSTER, and you won't have the > >> forensic information *anyway*. > > > > I think we should just apply your "preserve forensic information when > > freezing" patch. Then we're good to go without big arguments ;) > > Well, I'm happy with that, too. But you wanted it significantly > reworked and I haven't had time to do that.
I did? I only seem to remember suggesting to introduce HeapTupleHeaderGetRawXmin() and some bugfix around rewriteheap.c? I think the RawXmin() thing is a judgement call... Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
