Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0840464FCDF for ; Mon, 15 Sep 2008 11:02:16 -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 70427-08 for ; Mon, 15 Sep 2008 11:02:04 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com (nf-out-0910.google.com [64.233.182.189]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C145264FCD9 for ; Mon, 15 Sep 2008 11:02:03 -0300 (ADT) Received: by nf-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id c7so1175857nfi.23 for ; Mon, 15 Sep 2008 07:02:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.210.45.17 with SMTP id s17mr10174118ebs.192.1221487321499; Mon, 15 Sep 2008 07:02:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?80.222.33.27? ( [80.222.33.27]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id g12sm12882780nfb.28.2008.09.15.07.02.00 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Mon, 15 Sep 2008 07:02:00 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <48CE6AD7.1070605@enterprisedb.com> Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2008 17:01:59 +0300 Organization: EnterpriseDB User-Agent: Mozilla-Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (X11/20080509) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Simon Riggs CC: Tom Lane , Gregory Stark , ITAGAKI Takahiro , pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org Subject: Re: rmgr hooks and contrib/rmgr_hook 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> <24006.1221483138@sss.pgh.pa.us> <1221485063.3913.1350.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant> In-Reply-To: <1221485063.3913.1350.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Heikki Linnakangas 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: 200809/978 X-Sequence-Number: 124107 Simon Riggs wrote: > On Mon, 2008-09-15 at 08:52 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> 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. > > The lack of a chicken is not an argument against the use case for an > egg. > > But in any case, Bizgres was exactly this case, so they already did. We > just forced the authors to produce a code fork to do it, confusing > people rather than attracting people to Postgres. Are you referring to the bitmap index patch? IIRC, there was some non-trivial changes to indexam API in there, as well as issues with VACUUM. If anything, that patch supports the assumption that anything that needs WAL-logging is working at such a low-level that it needs to be in core anyway. -- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com