Re: Sequence Access Method WIP

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Sequence Access Method WIP
Date: 2016-01-29 12:00:37
Message-ID: 20160129120037.GA764006@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Petr Jelinek wrote:
> On 18 January 2016 at 09:19, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> > Needs rework after the commit of https://commitfest.postgresql.org/8/336/
>
> Here is version that applies to current master. There is some work to
> do (mostly cleanup) and the DDL is missing, but that's because I want
> to know what people think about the principle of how it works now and
> if it makes sense to finish it this way (explained in the original
> submission for Jan CF).

I would guess that the DDL boilterplate should come from Alexander
Korotkov's patch, right? I think a first easy step may be to combine
parts both patches so that we get the "amkind" column from this patch
and the DDL support from Alexander's patch (means that his proposed
command needs a new clause to specify the amkind); then the really tough
stuff in both Alexander's and this patch can be rebased on top of that.

--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Rahila Syed 2016-01-29 12:02:05 Re: [PROPOSAL] VACUUM Progress Checker.
Previous Message Alexander Korotkov 2016-01-29 11:59:49 Re: [PATCH] Refactoring of LWLock tranches