| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Haribabu Kommi <kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alexander Korotkov <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Pluggable storage |
| Date: | 2017-11-14 10:42:46 |
| Message-ID: | 20171114104246.aijbulukit2pt6zj@alvherre.pgsql |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hmm. Am I reading it right that this discussion led to moving
essentially all code from tqual.c to heapam? Given the hard time we've
had to get tqual.c right, it seems fundamentally misguided to me to
require that every single storage AM reimplements all the visibility
routines.
I think that changing tqual's API (such as not passing HeapTuples
anymore but some other more general representation) would be okay and
should be sufficient, but this wholesale movement of code seems
dangerous and wasteful in terms of future reimplementations that will be
necessary.
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2017-11-14 11:45:06 | Re: Migration to PGLister - After |
| Previous Message | Alexander Korotkov | 2017-11-14 09:53:53 | Re: [HACKERS] How to implement a SP-GiST index as a extension module? |