| From: | Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: WIP: Access method extendability |
| Date: | 2015-09-01 15:50:29 |
| Message-ID: | 55E5C945.6040808@sigaev.ru |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> In general pattern of generic WAL usage is following.
>
> 1) Start using generic WAL: specify relation
M-m, what about extensions which wants to use WAL but WAL record doesn't
connected to any relation? For example, transaction manager or kind of FDW.
>
> GenericXLogStart(index);
>
> 2) Register buffers
>
> GenericXLogRegister(0, buffer1, false);
> GenericXLogRegister(1, buffer2, true);
>
> first argument is a slot number, second is the buffer, third is flag indicating
> new buffer
Why do we need a slot number? to replace already registered buffer?
--
Teodor Sigaev E-mail: teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru
WWW: http://www.sigaev.ru/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David Fetter | 2015-09-01 15:54:05 | Re: Horizontal scalability/sharding |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2015-09-01 15:46:05 | Re: WIP: About CMake v2 |