Re: I: About "Our CLUSTER implementation is pessimal" patch

Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki.takahiro@gmail.com>

View thread

From: Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki.takahiro@gmail.com>

To: Leonardo Francalanci <m_lists@yahoo.it>

Cc: Josh Kupershmidt <schmiddy@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org

Date: 2010-09-28T02:05:07Z

Lists: pgsql-hackers

Attachments

sorted_cluster-20100928.patch (application/octet-stream) patch

On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 8:04 PM, Itagaki Takahiro
<itagaki.takahiro@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think the patch is almost ready to commit, but still
> have some comments for the usability and documentations.
> I hope native English speakers would help improving docs.

I'm checking the latest patch for applying.
I found we actually use maintenance_work_mem for the sort in seqscan+sort
case, but the cost was estimated based on work_mem in the patch. I added
internal cost_sort_with_mem() into costsize.c.

> * Documentation could be a bit more simplified like as
>  "CLUSTER requires twice disk spaces of your original table".
>  The added description seems too difficult for standard users.

I re-ordered some description in the doc. Does it look better?
Comments and suggestions welcome.

-- 
Itagaki Takahiro