Re: WIP: Access method extendability

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: WIP: Access method extendability
Date: 2014-10-28 23:25:35
Message-ID: 20141028232535.GH5873@awork2.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2014-10-28 20:17:57 +0000, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On 28 October 2014 17:47, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> > On 2014-10-28 17:45:36 +0000, Simon Riggs wrote:
> >> I'd like to avoid all of the pain by making persistent AMs that are
> >> recoverable after a crash, rather than during crash recovery.
> >
> > Besides the actual difficulities of supporting this, imo not being
> > available on HS and directly after a failover essentially makes them
> > next to useless.
>
> Broken WAL implementations are worse than useless.
>
> I'm saying we should work on how to fix broken indexes first, before
> we allow a crop of new code that might cause them.

Why do we presume all of them will be that buggy? And why is that
different for nbtree, gin, gist? And how is any form of automated
invalidation changing anything fundamentally?

To me this is a pretty independent issue.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2014-10-28 23:26:45 Re: group locking: incomplete patch, just for discussion
Previous Message Robert Haas 2014-10-28 23:24:06 Re: group locking: incomplete patch, just for discussion