| From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Haribabu Kommi <kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Alexander Korotkov <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Pluggable storage |
| Date: | 2018-06-14 02:25:56 |
| Message-ID: | CAA4eK1KOxHsyijHqp5z7TQDviP_rsrWBbxBvAMvuvY9k+-ZK=w@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 1:50 AM, Haribabu Kommi
<kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 4:44 PM Haribabu Kommi <kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
>
> VACUUM:
> Not much changes are done in this apart moving the Vacuum visibility
> functions as part of the
> storage. But idea for the Vacuum was with each access method can define how
> it should perform.
>
We are planning to have a somewhat different mechanism for vacuum (for
non-delete marked indexes), so if you can provide some details or
discuss what you have in mind before implementation of same, that
would be great.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2018-06-14 02:37:40 | Shared access methods? |
| Previous Message | Masahiko Sawada | 2018-06-14 02:22:48 | Re: [Proposal] Table-level Transparent Data Encryption (TDE) and Key Management Service (KMS) |