Message-ID: <d9d7b9ce-67a3-44ec-b191-ecd736ad82e6@proxel.se>
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2024 17:53:36 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: PATCH: Add hooks for pg_total_relation_size and pg_indexes_size
To: Abdoulaye Ba <abdoulayeba29@gmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
References: <CA+-ifOaCGFcv0KuTwU-Y83a2kwL+CTG+7frx4khxJt3KQN+GUQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <15ee4989-c366-4d1b-95a6-d8a49b14aaf5@proxel.se>
 <CA+-ifObTf=5p8bAgVZYXOrOpPi3J=6nn7KBXtBJJqCm=qMn3VA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Language: en-US
From: Andreas Karlsson <andreas@proxel.se>
In-Reply-To: <CA+-ifObTf=5p8bAgVZYXOrOpPi3J=6nn7KBXtBJJqCm=qMn3VA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/d9d7b9ce-67a3-44ec-b191-ecd736ad82e6%40proxel.se>
Precedence: bulk

On 8/9/24 6:59 PM, Abdoulaye Ba wrote:>     The primary use case for 
this hook is to allow extensions to account
>     for additional storage mechanisms that are not covered by the
>     default PostgreSQL relation size calculations. For instance, in our
>     project, we are working with an external indexing system (Tantivy)
>     that maintains additional data structures outside the standard
>     PostgreSQL storage. This hook allows us to include the size of these
>     additional structures in the total relation size calculations.
> 
>     While I understand your suggestion about custom index AMs, the
>     intent behind this hook is broader. It is not limited to custom
>     index types but can also be used for other forms of external storage
>     that need to be accounted for in relation size calculations. This is
>     why a generic callback hook was chosen over extending the index AM
>     interface.
> 
>     However, if there is a consensus that such a hook would be better
>     suited within the index AM interface for cases involving custom
>     index storage, I'm open to discussing this further and exploring how
>     it could be integrated more tightly with the existing PostgreSQL AM
>     framework.

Yeah, I strongly suspected it was ParadeDB. :)

I am only one developer but I really do not like solving this with a 
hook, instead I think the proper solution is to integrate this properly 
with custom AMs and storage managers. I think we should do it properly 
or not at all.

Andreas