On 26/04/13 15:34, Gavin Flower wrote:
On 26/04/13 15:19, Mark Kirkwood wrote:
While in general you are quite correct - in the above case
(particularly as I've supplied a test case) it should be pretty
obvious that any moderately modern version of postgres on any
supported platform will exhibit this.
>
While I admit that I did not look closely at your test case - I am aware
that several times changes to Postgres from one minor version to
another, can have drastic unintended side effects (which might, or might
not, be relevant to your situation). Besides, it helps sets the scene,
and is one less thing that needs to be deduced.
Indeed - however, my perhaps slightly grumpy reply to your email was
based on an impression of over keen-ness to dismiss my message without
reading it (!) and a - dare I say it - one size fits all presentation of
"here are the hoops to jump through". Now I spent a reasonable amount of
time preparing the message and its attendant test case - and a comment
such as your based on *not reading it* ...errrm... well lets say I think
we can/should do better.
I am concerned that the deafening lack of any replies to my original
message is a result of folk glancing at your original quick reply and
thinking... incomplete problem spec...ignore... when that is not that
case - yes I should have muttered "9.2" in the original email, but we
have covered that now.
Regards
Mark
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
