| From: | Zdenek Kotala <Zdenek(dot)Kotala(at)Sun(dot)COM> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Proposal: In-Place upgrade concept |
| Date: | 2007-07-04 07:39:25 |
| Message-ID: | 468B4EAD.2070100@sun.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
>
>> I do not expect that old code will work with new index structure. I want
>> to keep both implementation and old index will be processed by old code
>> and new one will be processed by new implementation. Each will have
>> different OID and pg_class.relam will point to correct implementation.
>
> I don't think it's quite that easy when you consider user-defined
> datatypes. Where are you going to get two sets of opclasses from?
Good point. I think if new index implementation does not change meaning
of strategy and function number old opclasses set could be used. And it
is only for new created or recreated indexes. Existing indexes will work
fine with old opclasses set.
Zdenek
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Martijn van Oosterhout | 2007-07-04 08:19:13 | Re: Proposal: In-Place upgrade concept |
| Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2007-07-04 07:22:11 | Re: what is difference between LOCAL and GLOBAL TEMP TABLES in PostgreSQL |