Feedback-ID: id4a34324:Fastmail
Date: Wed, 15 May 2024 15:03:19 -0700
From: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Cc: Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>,
	Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>,
	Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>,
	PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>,
	Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com>, Luc Vlaming <luc@swarm64.com>,
	Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>,
	Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>,
	Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres@gmail.com>,
	Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Introduce new multi insert Table AM and improve performance of
 various SQL commands with it for Heap AM
Message-ID: <20240515220319.jzonzvw52wh4ltbl@awork3.anarazel.de>
References: <CALj2ACUz5+_YNEa4ZY-XG960_oXefM50MjD71VgSCAVDkF3bzQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <202405150914.q2hc2cl2eqzf@alvherre.pgsql>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <202405150914.q2hc2cl2eqzf@alvherre.pgsql>
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20240515220319.jzonzvw52wh4ltbl%40awork3.anarazel.de>
Precedence: bulk

Hi,

On 2024-05-15 11:14:14 +0200, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2024-May-15, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> 
> > It looks like with the use of the new multi insert table access method
> > (TAM) for COPY (v20-0005), pgbench regressed about 35% [1].
> 
> Where does this acronym "TAM" comes from for "table access method"?  I
> find it thoroughly horrible and wish we didn't use it.  What's wrong
> with using "table AM"?  It's not that much longer, much clearer and
> reuses our well-established acronym AM.

Strongly agreed. I don't know why I dislike TAM so much though.

Greetings,

Andres Freund