On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 9:25 AM, Chris Browne <cbbrowne@xxxxxxx> wrote: > robertmhaas@xxxxxxxxx (Robert Haas) writes: >> On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 11:45 AM, Kevin Grittner >> <Kevin.Grittner@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> Well, I'm comfortable digging in my heels against doing *lame* hints >>> just because "it's what all the other kids are doing," which I think >>> is the only thing which would have satisfied the OP on this thread. >>> From both on-list posts and ones exchanged off-list with me, it >>> seems he was stubbornly resistant to properly tuning the server to >>> see if any problems remained, or posting particular problems to see >>> how they would be most effectively handled in PostgreSQL. We >>> obviously can't be drawn into dumb approaches because of >>> ill-informed demands like that. >> >> Nor was I proposing any such thing. But that doesn't make "we don't >> want hints" an accurate statement. Despite the impression that OP >> went away with, the real situation is a lot more nuanced than that, >> and the statement on the Todo list gives the wrong impression, IMHO. > > I have added the following comment to the ToDo: > > We are not interested to implement hints in ways they are commonly > implemented on other databases, and proposals based on "because > they've got them" will not be welcomed. If you have an idea that > avoids the problems that have been observed with other hint systems, > that could lead to valuable discussion. > > That seems to me to characterize the nuance. Where exactly are the problems with other systems noted? Most other systems have this option so saying "They have problems" is a giant cop out. -- Rob Wultsch wultsch@xxxxxxxxx -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
