| From: | Alexander Korotkov <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Haribabu Kommi <kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(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: | 2018-02-26 08:19:27 |
| Message-ID: | CAPpHfdueaQ=C0xVZxkOzCyhZGHMRtExckvh+vkGSLA3WCAx8Dg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 2:20 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 5:56 AM, Alexander Korotkov
> <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> wrote:
> > BTW, EnterpriseDB announces zheap table access method (heap with undo
> log)
> > [2]. I think this is great, and I'm looking forward for publishing
> zheap in
> > mailing lists. But I'm concerning about its compatibility with pluggable
> > table access methods API. Does zheap use table AM API from this
> thread? Or
> > does it just override current heap and needs to be adopted to use table
> AM
> > API? Or does it implements own API?
>
> Right now it just hacks the code. The plan is to adapt it to whatever
> API we settle on in this thread.
Great, thank you for clarification. I'm looking forward reviewing zheap :)
------
Alexander Korotkov
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Lætitia Avrot | 2018-02-26 08:56:32 | Re: VACUUM FULL name is very confusing to some people (or to most non expert people) |
| Previous Message | Tsunakawa, Takayuki | 2018-02-26 08:13:02 | RE: [bug fix] pg_rewind takes long time because it mistakenly copies data files |