Feedback-ID: i0fe9450f:Fastmail
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2022 14:30:59 +0900
From: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
To: Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres@gmail.com>
Cc: Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>,
	Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com>, Luc Vlaming <luc@swarm64.com>,
	Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>,
	PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>,
	Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, Paul Guo <guopa@vmware.com>,
	Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>
Subject: Re: New Table Access Methods for Multi and Single Inserts
Message-ID: <Y0ZRE+glRLDUyUb3@paquier.xyz>
References: 
 <CALj2ACXoKTQuz8FKJxgB_=Jr_2_ZCy7gDteBrUa_5pd7Ov_1Tg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALj2ACVbcYCvTw_jMnuGjLMBiQug7YAL3ezJFM9QMdewoJZLcw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAFiTN-tBRvtRNgeW5mmdwXoDNubhUrYqzLF58O_+JLo_cFb_7Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALj2ACWZ95GhLTXc0dw1_Nu05xs130HPCnWX4tfkmp0CtBCMJg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALj2ACX0fvSAxiGB8_yDsXo7JHSaDNUSHwH9OEpiMgnrynaP+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALj2ACXBTFKOTi0_ni0Ef+DHWy8pH=SX6Q2tyG-8WmmsfxatNQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALj2ACXdrOmB6Na9amHWZHKvRT3Z0nwTRsCwoMT-npOBtmXLXg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAEze2Wj2+s64uw-g3fkNJgLfmT9mzJd10z4sB6NogYO_DgPKwQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALj2ACXSRTo4O_YzTg2cnsocnkwN+hyQH4HAm3KH2Z83NofWKg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAEze2Wi-CauoDfu9M2av4ntXdvoq2C6UdTnECTCL94Xpz7xi1g@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="xGB1j9qsZxozSFVg"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAEze2Wi-CauoDfu9M2av4ntXdvoq2C6UdTnECTCL94Xpz7xi1g@mail.gmail.com>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/Y0ZRE%2BglRLDUyUb3%40paquier.xyz>
Precedence: bulk


--xGB1j9qsZxozSFVg
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, Mar 07, 2022 at 05:09:23PM +0100, Matthias van de Meent wrote:
> That's for the AM-internal flushing; yes. I was thinking about the AM
> api for flushing that's used when finalizing the batched insert; i.e.
> table_multi_insert_flush.
>=20
> Currently it assumes that all buffered tuples will be flushed after
> one call (which is correct for heap), but putting those unflushed
> tuples all at once back in memory might not be desirable or possible
> (for e.g. columnar); so we might need to call table_multi_insert_flush
> until there's no more buffered tuples.

This thread has been idle for 6 months now, so I have marked it as
returned with feedback as of what looks like a lack of activity.  I
have looked at what's been proposed, and I am not really sure if the
direction taken is correct, though there may be a potential gain in
consolidating the multi-insert path within the table AM set of
callbacks.
--
Michael

--xGB1j9qsZxozSFVg
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=oyEA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--xGB1j9qsZxozSFVg--