Re: create table like: ACCESS METHOD

From: David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>
To: Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Jacob Champion <pchampion(at)vmware(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Ashwin Agrawal <aagrawal(at)pivotal(dot)io>, Ashutosh Sharma <ashu(dot)coek88(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
Subject: Re: create table like: ACCESS METHOD
Date: 2021-03-19 15:52:37
Message-ID: 972aa205-6b38-7edd-bc1f-55ac166974d1@pgmasters.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 1/19/21 4:03 PM, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 30, 2020 at 12:33:56PM +0000, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> There are no tests for the new functionality, please could you add some?
>
> Did you look at the most recent patch?
>
> +CREATE ACCESS METHOD heapdup TYPE TABLE HANDLER heap_tableam_handler;
> +CREATE TABLE likeam() USING heapdup;
> +CREATE TABLE likeamlike(LIKE likeam INCLUDING ALL);
>
> Also, I just realized that Dilip's toast compression patch adds "INCLUDING
> COMPRESSION", which is stored in pg_am. That's an implementation detail of
> that patch, but it's not intuitive that "including access method" wouldn't
> include the compression stored there. So I think this should use "INCLUDING
> TABLE ACCESS METHOD" not just ACCESS METHOD.

Simon, do you know when you'll have a chance to review the updated patch
in [1]?

Regards,
--
-David
david(at)pgmasters(dot)net

[1]
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20210119210331.GN8560%40telsasoft.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Steele 2021-03-19 16:09:05 Re: Change default of checkpoint_completion_target
Previous Message Markus Wanner 2021-03-19 15:52:12 Re: Logical Replication vs. 2PC