| From: | Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Sequence Access Method WIP |
| Date: | 2014-11-07 23:57:41 |
| Message-ID: | 545D5C75.90303@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 08/11/14 00:45, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Nov 5, 2014, at 5:43 PM, Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>> I don't see how to make that work with ALTER SEQUENCE USING to be honest and I do care quite a lot about that use-case (I think the ability to convert the "local" sequences to 3rd party ones and back is very important).
>
> What specific problems do you foresee? There's an issue if something depends on one of the added sequence columns, but if that is the case then you had *better* fail.
>
> I think that the debugability value of making extra sequence columns human-readable is quite high.
>
My main problem is actually not with having tuple per-seqAM, but more
with the fact that Heikki does not want to have last_value as compulsory
column/parameter. How is the new AM then supposed to know where to pick
up and if it even can pick up?
--
Petr Jelinek http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2014-11-08 00:06:41 | Re: row_to_json bug with index only scans: empty keys! |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2014-11-07 23:45:39 | Re: Sequence Access Method WIP |