Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 664E064FD10
	for <pgsql-hackers-postgresql.org@postgresql.org>;
	Mon, 15 Sep 2008 09:53:14 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86])
	by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 53183-08 for
	<pgsql-hackers-postgresql.org@postgresql.org>;
	Mon, 15 Sep 2008 09:53:09 -0300 (ADT)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12A5664FD0D
	for <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>;
	Mon, 15 Sep 2008 09:53:08 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m8FCqIWs024007;
	Mon, 15 Sep 2008 08:52:18 -0400 (EDT)
To: Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com>
cc: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>,
	Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>,
	ITAGAKI Takahiro <itagaki.takahiro@oss.ntt.co.jp>,
	pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: rmgr hooks and contrib/rmgr_hook 
In-reply-to: <87sks1oi4o.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com> 
References: <20080901121833.4A18.52131E4D@oss.ntt.co.jp>
	<1220345064.4371.275.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant>
	<20080902174613.76B2.52131E4D@oss.ntt.co.jp>
	<1220348980.4371.316.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant>
	<14451.1220369969@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<1220372673.4371.465.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant>
	<48CB72C8.1070700@enterprisedb.com>
	<1221470800.3913.1229.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant>
	<87sks1oi4o.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com>
	message dated "Mon, 15 Sep 2008 10:47:35 +0100"
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2008 08:52:18 -0400
Message-ID: <24006.1221483138@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=none
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Archive-Number: 200809/963
X-Sequence-Number: 124092

Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> writes:
>> Indexes have always been able to be added dynamically. Now they can be
>> recovered correctly as well.

> Hm, so currently if you want to add a new indexam you can't just insert into
> pg_am and make them recoverable. You basically have to build in your new index
> access method into Postgres with the new rmgr. That is annoying and a problem
> worth tackling.

I concur with Heikki that that's not exactly a compelling use-case.
I've never heard of anyone building a non-core index AM at all; much
less trying to use it in a production context.  Given the obvious
potential for version-mismatch-type problems, it's hard to believe
that anyone ever would try.

			regards, tom lane