| From: | Antonin Houska <ah(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Junwang Zhao <zhjwpku(at)gmail(dot)com>, cca5507 <cca5507(at)qq(dot)com>, Daniil Davydov <3danissimo(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(at)vondra(dot)me> |
| Subject: | Re: Batching in executor |
| Date: | 2026-07-17 12:15:52 |
| Message-ID: | 31019.1784290552@localhost |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Antonin Houska <ah(at)cybertec(dot)at> wrote:
> 0003:
>
> * I'm not sure the batch-specific callbacks should be mandatory
>
> diff --git a/src/backend/access/table/tableamapi.c b/src/backend/access/table/tableamapi.c
> index 5450a27faeb..9ef6b5cca65 100644
> --- a/src/backend/access/table/tableamapi.c
> +++ b/src/backend/access/table/tableamapi.c
> @@ -45,6 +45,8 @@ GetTableAmRoutine(Oid amhandler)
> Assert(routine->scan_end != NULL);
> Assert(routine->scan_rescan != NULL);
> Assert(routine->scan_getnextslot != NULL);
> + Assert(routine->scan_getnextbatch != NULL);
> + Assert(routine->batch_slot_callbacks != NULL);
I mean the callback is mandatory in the current version, but ISTM that
nodeSeqscan.c does not work here if the AM does not support batching.
--
Antonin Houska
Web: https://www.cybertec-postgresql.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Antonin Houska | 2026-07-17 12:20:17 | Re: Unexpected changes of CurrentResourceOwner and CurrentMemoryContext |
| Previous Message | Antonin Houska | 2026-07-17 12:12:04 | Re: Batching in executor |