> On Fri, 2008-09-05 at 15:23 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> How necessary is this given the recent fixes to allow the stats file to
>> be kept on a ramdisk?
> I would prefer this approach and back-out the other change.
Even if we get on-demand done, I wouldn't see it as a reason to back out
the statfile relocation work. In an environment where the stats are
demanded frequently, you could still need that for performance.
(In fact, maybe this patch ought to include some sort of maximum update
rate tunable? The worst case behavior could actually be WORSE than now.)
regards, tom lane