Re: CLUSTER and indisclustered

Neil Conway <nconway@klamath.dyndns.org>

From: Neil Conway <nconway@klamath.dyndns.org>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@atentus.com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>, <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2002-08-09T01:04:03Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@atentus.com> writes:
> What if I [try to] extend the grammar to support an additional ANALYZE
> in CLUSTER, so that it analyzes the table automatically?

I don't like this -- it seems like bloat. What's the advantage of

CLUSTER foo ON bar ANALYZE;

over

CLUSTER foo ON bar;
ANALYZE;

> Or maybe just do an analyze of the table automatically after the
> CLUSTERing.

Hmmm... I don't really see the problem with adding a note in the docs
suggesting that users following a CLUSTER with an ANALYZE (of course,
that assumes that the CLUSTER will significantly change the ordering
of the data in the table, which isn't always the case -- which is
another reason why make this automatic seems unwarranted, IMHO). It
seems like you're looking for a solution to a non-existent problem.

Cheers,

Neil

-- 
Neil Conway <neilconway@rogers.com>
PGP Key ID: DB3C29FC