Re: Remaining beta blockers

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Remaining beta blockers
Date: 2013-05-03 16:45:36
Message-ID: 26547.1367599536@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On 2013-05-03 12:10:14 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Right. The whole thing is just a kluge, which I'm convinced we'll
>> regret sooner or later --- probably sooner.

> I tentatively agree as well. The only argument for introducing some
> additional location for such information is that it would be the start
> of an infrastructure for information we would need for incrementally
> adding checksums, page upgrades and such.

It's possible that a metadata fork would be a good design for such
stuff, but I'd want to see a pretty completely worked-out design before
committing to the idea. In any case we're way too late in the 9.3 cycle
to be considering something like that right now.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2013-05-03 16:49:46 Re: Remaining beta blockers
Previous Message Andres Freund 2013-05-03 16:34:57 Re: Remaining beta blockers