| From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: MaxOffsetNumber for Table AMs |
| Date: | 2021-05-05 19:26:53 |
| Message-ID: | CAH2-Wzk_p0G=6v=pZ+iiu0cW0C+tJ__ZQwz_DiJziVZH1SBxRw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, May 5, 2021 at 12:09 PM Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> wrote:
> Like anything, we make the decision at the time we have a reason to
> break something. But why are are exensions disfavored in this
> calculation vs. in-core? Isn't it a lot easier to update in-core code
> to new APIs?
We don't really have an API for how TIDs behave (unless you happen to
want to emulate heapam, which is reasonable and was expected). It's
unspecified because nobody knows what it is (or what it should be)
just yet. AFAICT there is no TID API to break.
--
Peter Geoghegan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Justin Pryzby | 2021-05-05 19:36:01 | Re: Re: COPY table_name (single_column) FROM 'unknown.txt' DELIMITER E'\n' |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2021-05-05 19:22:17 | Re: COPY table_name (single_column) FROM 'unknown.txt' DELIMITER E'\n' |