| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: COPY FREEZE and setting PD_ALL_VISIBLE/visibility map bits |
| Date: | 2019-04-04 19:15:54 |
| Message-ID: | 20190404191554.GA7161@alvherre.pgsql |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2019-Apr-04, Andres Freund wrote:
> I'm totally not OK with this from a layering
> POV. CheckAndSetAllVisibleBulkInsertState is entirely heap specific
> (without being named such), whereas all the heap specific bits are
> getting moved below tableam.
This is a fair complaint, but on the other hand the COPY changes for
table AM are still being developed, so there's no ground on which to
rebase this patch. Do you have a timeline on getting the COPY one
committed?
I think it's fair to ask the RMT for an exceptional extension of a
couple of working days for this patch.
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2019-04-04 19:17:47 | Re: Row Level Security − leakproof-ness and performance implications |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2019-04-04 19:05:55 | Re: New vacuum option to do only freezing |