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