From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jaime Casanova <jaime(dot)casanova(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Haribabu Kommi <kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Patch: Write Amplification Reduction Method (WARM) |
Date: | 2017-01-31 22:51:01 |
Message-ID: | 20170131225101.2l2fft4nnq525lx7@alap3.anarazel.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2017-01-31 17:21:28 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> > Hm, sorry for missing this earlier. I think CatalogUpdateIndexes() is
> > fairly widely used in extensions - it seems like a pretty harsh change
> > to not leave some backward compatibility layer in place.
>
> If an extension is doing that, it is probably constructing tuples to put
> into the catalog, which means it'd be equally (and much more quietly)
> broken by any change to the catalog's schema. We've never considered
> such an argument as a reason not to change catalog schemas, though.
I know of several extensions that use CatalogUpdateIndexes() to update
their own tables. Citus included (It's trivial to change on our side, so
that's not a reason to do or not do something). There really is no
convenient API to do so without it.
> (I'm a little more concerned by Alvaro's apparent position that WARM
> is a done deal; I didn't think so. This particular change seems like
> good cleanup anyhow, however.)
Yea, I don't think we're even close to that either.
Andres
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Thomas Munro | 2017-01-31 23:25:18 | Re: WIP: [[Parallel] Shared] Hash |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2017-01-31 22:45:36 | Re: Patch: Write Amplification Reduction Method (WARM) |