From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Alexander Korotkov <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru>, Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: WIP: Rework access method interface |
Date: | 2015-11-02 17:42:01 |
Message-ID: | 20151102174201.GE6104@alvherre.pgsql |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> I follow your reasoning, but I don't particularly want to make this
> patch wait on a large and invasive refactoring of existing headers.
Sure.
> As a down payment on this problem, maybe we could invent a new planner
> header that provides just enough info to support amapi.h and fdwapi.h;
> it looks like this would be "typedef struct PlannerInfo PlannerInfo;",
> likewise for RelOptInfo, ForeignPath, and IndexPath, and real declarations
> of Cost and Selectivity.
Works for me, under the assumption that, down the road and without any
rush, we can shuffle some more stuff around to make this whole area a
bit cleaner.
> Not sure what to name the new header.
Yeah, this is always a problem for such patches :-( I have no great
ideas ATM.
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2015-11-02 17:44:02 | Re: exposing pg_controldata and pg_config as functions |
Previous Message | Joe Conway | 2015-11-02 17:41:53 | Re: ALTER SYSTEM vs symlink |