Re: patch - per-tablespace random_page_cost/seq_page_cost

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> Hmm, I see this needs to be rebased over Tom's latest changes, but the
> conflict I got was in syscache.h, rather than syscache.c.  Not sure if
> that's what you were going for or if there's another issue.  Updated
> patch attached.

I'm planning to go look at Naylor's bki refactoring patch now.  Assuming
there isn't any showstopper problem with that, do you object to it
getting committed first?  Either order is going to create a merge
problem, but it seems like we'd be best off to get Naylor's patch in
so people can resync affected patches before the January commitfest
starts.

			regards, tom lane