| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Luc Vlaming <luc(at)swarm64(dot)com>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Introduce new multi insert Table AM and improve performance of various SQL commands with it for Heap AM |
| Date: | 2024-05-15 22:03:19 |
| Message-ID: | 20240515220319.jzonzvw52wh4ltbl@awork3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2024-05-15 11:14:14 +0200, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2024-May-15, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
>
> > It looks like with the use of the new multi insert table access method
> > (TAM) for COPY (v20-0005), pgbench regressed about 35% [1].
>
> Where does this acronym "TAM" comes from for "table access method"? I
> find it thoroughly horrible and wish we didn't use it. What's wrong
> with using "table AM"? It's not that much longer, much clearer and
> reuses our well-established acronym AM.
Strongly agreed. I don't know why I dislike TAM so much though.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2024-05-15 22:13:20 | Re: Fix src/test/subscription/t/029_on_error.pl test when wal_debug is enabled |
| Previous Message | Thomas Munro | 2024-05-15 21:46:41 | Re: Why is citext/regress failing on hamerkop? |