Re: Tid scan improvements

On 3/26/19 8:11 AM, Edmund Horner wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 at 11:54, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>
>> Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
>>> I was kinda hoping to keep block numbers out of the "main" APIs, to
>>> avoid assuming everything is BLCKSZ based. I don't have a particular
>>> problem allowing an optional setscanlimits type callback that works with
>>> block numbers. The planner could check its presence and just not build
>>> tid range scans if not present. Alternatively a bespoke scan API for
>>> tid range scans, like the later patches in the tableam series for
>>> bitmap, sample, analyze scans, might be an option.
>>
>> Given Andres' API concerns, and the short amount of time remaining in
>> this CF, I'm not sure how much of this patch set we can expect to land
>> in v12. It seems like it might be a good idea to scale back our ambitions
>> and see whether there's a useful subset we can push in easily.
>
> I agree. It'll take some time to digest Andres' advice and write a
> better patch.
>
> Should I set update CF app to a) set the target version to 13, and/or
> move it to next commitfest?

If you plan to continue working on it in this CF then you can just
change the target to PG13. If you plan to take a break and pick up the
work later then go ahead and push it to the next CF.

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