| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: WAL-support for Pluggable Indexes |
| Date: | 2010-02-21 18:14:00 |
| Message-ID: | 26134.1266776040@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:
> We already have a pluggable index API, but not one that supports
> recoverability.
> It is a simple patch to add recoverability to the index API, if we have
> the will to do so.
I suggest you go re-read the archives before asserting this is a simple
no-thought-required fix. If it were, it'd have been done before.
The killer problem as I recall it is how to identify the plugin rmgrs
to use, bearing in mind that you can't rely on looking at the catalogs.
We don't have a design for that, and I don't want one that's been thrown
together under intense schedule pressure.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2010-02-21 18:20:49 | Re: WAL-support for Pluggable Indexes |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2010-02-21 18:13:46 | Re: scheduler in core |