On Nov 1, 2009, at 7:43 AM, Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 6:04 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
>> Looking at this a little more, it seems that part of the motivation
>> for the existing design is that user-created AMs might require
>> arbitrary options, which therefore can't be wired into the system
>> catalogs. There's no equivalent for tablespaces (we could add one
>> some day, I suppose), so there's less intrinsic reason to think we
>> have to do it that way.
> Can't custom modules define arbitrary options which they declare can
> be defined per tablespace?
Yeah, probably we can support that for free, although I'm not sure
there is much demand for it.
> We could have a column for all booleans, a column for all integers,
> etc. but that's not really any more normalized than having a single
> - how to marshal each value
That has no advantages and several disadvantages AFAICS.
I don't want to get sidetracked here. The real issue is the one I
discussed in the portion of the email you didn't quote...
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Marko Tiikkaja||Date: 2009-11-01 15:12:36|
|Subject: Re: WIP: push AFTER-trigger execution into ModifyTable node|
|Previous:||From: Greg Stark||Date: 2009-11-01 12:43:57|
|Subject: Re: per-tablespace random_page_cost/seq_page_cost|