From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: aborting a non-speculative insertion |
Date: | 2019-06-11 16:11:41 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmoYZnq_XZWLjnxkbcEBg8OJRRNKqFuU_-ws_qcG3dEN=3w@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 12:06 PM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> > This is relevant to my little project to make the TOAST logic reusable
> > by other AMs, because the comments in tableam.h suggest you can only
> > complete a speculative insertion if you've previously performed one.
> > If we allow any AM to be used to implement a TOAST table, then it
> > needs to be documented that such AMs have to cope with this kind of
> > case.
>
> Hm - you're thinking of making the case of toast AM and main AM being
> different working? I'm not sure I'd otherwise expect to again go through
> the AM, although I'm not sure about that.
I was, but I think we have the same requirement even if we don't,
because detoasting a datum from anywhere goes through a common code
path.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2019-06-11 16:24:06 | pgsql: Fix order of steps in DISCARD ALL documentation |
Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2019-06-11 16:06:39 | Re: aborting a non-speculative insertion |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2019-06-11 16:14:46 | Re: Status of the table access method work |
Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2019-06-11 16:06:39 | Re: aborting a non-speculative insertion |