From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
Cc: Haribabu Kommi <kommi.haribabu@gmail.com>
Cc: Alexander Korotkov <a.korotkov@postgrespro.ru>
Cc: Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com>
Cc: Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Pluggable storage
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2017 11:42:46 +0100
Message-ID: <20171114104246.aijbulukit2pt6zj@alvherre.pgsql> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+TgmobOyL+qBARGd1R=3u3dVgLtr1B1MZHJBOkuRoH1e_JLnw@mail.gmail.com>
Hmm. Am I reading it right that this discussion led to moving
essentially all code from tqual.c to heapam? Given the hard time we've
had to get tqual.c right, it seems fundamentally misguided to me to
require that every single storage AM reimplements all the visibility
routines.
I think that changing tqual's API (such as not passing HeapTuples
anymore but some other more general representation) would be okay and
should be sufficient, but this wholesale movement of code seems
dangerous and wasteful in terms of future reimplementations that will be
necessary.
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org, robertmhaas@gmail.com, amit.kapila16@gmail.com, kommi.haribabu@gmail.com, a.korotkov@postgrespro.ru, thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Pluggable storage
In-Reply-To: <20171114104246.aijbulukit2pt6zj@alvherre.pgsql>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox