Re: Comments on Custom RMGRs

On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 4:20 PM Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> wrote:
> Regarding this particular change: the checkpointing hook seems more
> like a table AM feature, so I agree with you that we should have a good
> idea how a real table AM might use this, rather than only
> pg_stat_statements.

I would even be OK with a pg_stat_statements example that is fully
working and fully explained. I just don't want to have no example at
all. The original proposal has been changed twice because of
complaints that the hook wasn't quite useful enough, but I think that
only proves that v3 is closer to being useful than v1. If v1 is 40% of
the way to useful and v3 is 120% of the way to useful, wonderful! But
if v1 is 20% of the way to being useful and v3 is 60% of the way to
being useful, it's not time to commit anything yet. I don't know which
is the case, and I think if someone wants this to be committed, they
need to explain clearly why it's the first and not the second.

--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com