| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Haribabu Kommi <kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Alexander Korotkov <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Pluggable Storage - Andres's take |
| Date: | 2018-08-21 08:59:48 |
| Message-ID: | 20180821085948.db5rnzwipxze3mx3@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2018-08-21 16:55:47 +1000, Haribabu Kommi wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 5, 2018 at 7:48 PM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> > I'm currently in the process of rebasing zheap onto the pluggable
> > storage work. The goal, which seems to work surprisingly well, is to
> > find issues that the current pluggable storage patch doesn't yet deal
> > with. I plan to push a tree including a lot of fixes and improvements
> > soon.
> >
>
> Sorry for coming late to this thread.
No worries.
> That's good. Did you find any problems in porting zheap into pluggable
> storage? Does it needs any API changes or new API requirement?
A lot, yes. The big changes are:
- removal of HeapPageScanDesc
- introduction of explicit support functions for tablesample & bitmap scans
- introduction of callbacks for vacuum_rel, cluster
And quite a bit more along those lines.
> Does the new TupleTableSlot abstraction patches has fixed any of these
> issues in the recent thread [1]? so that I can look into the change of
> FDW API to return slot instead of tuple.
Yea, that'd be a good thing to start with.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Surafel Temesgen | 2018-08-21 12:47:07 | Re: FETCH FIRST clause PERCENT option |
| Previous Message | Chris Travers | 2018-08-21 08:49:29 | Re: Two proposed modifications to the PostgreSQL FDW |