Re: What's needed for cache-only table scan?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Kohei KaiGai <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp>
Cc: PgHacker <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: What's needed for cache-only table scan?
Date: 2013-11-12 17:35:19
Message-ID: 8994.1384277719@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Kohei KaiGai <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp> writes:
> So, are you thinking it is a feasible approach to focus on custom-scan
> APIs during the upcoming CF3, then table-caching feature as use-case
> of this APIs on CF4?

Sure. If you work on this extension after CF3, and it reveals that the
custom scan stuff needs some adjustments, there would be time to do that
in CF4. The policy about what can be submitted in CF4 is that we don't
want new major features that no one has seen before, not that you can't
make fixes to previously submitted stuff. Something like a new hook
in vacuum wouldn't be a "major feature", anyway.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2013-11-12 17:50:33 Re: logical changeset generation v6.6
Previous Message Tom Lane 2013-11-12 17:30:41 Re: Possible memory leak with SQL function?