From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
---|---|
To: | Jelte Fennema-Nio <postgres(at)jeltef(dot)nl> |
Cc: | Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander(at)timescale(dot)com>, Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Fabrízio de Royes Mello <fabriziomello(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: Add test module for Table Access Method |
Date: | 2024-01-16 04:58:10 |
Message-ID: | ZaYM4jR7lDS_A4Ii@paquier.xyz |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jan 15, 2024 at 03:40:30PM +0100, Jelte Fennema-Nio wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 at 14:26, Aleksander Alekseev
> <aleksander(at)timescale(dot)com> wrote:
>> To be fair, Postgres uses TAM internally, so there is at least one
>> complete and up-to-date real-life example.
>
> Sure, but that one is quite hard to follow if you don't already know
> lots of details of the heap storage. At least for me, having a minimal
> example was extremely helpful and it made for a great code skeleton to
> start from.
Hmm. I'd rather have it do something useful in terms of test coverage
rather than being just an empty skull.
How about adding the same kind of coverage as dummy_index_am with a
couple of reloptions then? That can serve as a point of reference
when a table AM needs a few custom options. A second idea would be to
show how to use toast relations when implementing your new AM, where a
toast table could be created even in cases where we did not want one
with heap, when it comes to size limitations with char and/or varchar,
and that makes for a simpler needs_toast_table callback.
--
Michaxel
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bharath Rupireddy | 2024-01-16 04:58:29 | Re: introduce dynamic shared memory registry |
Previous Message | Dilip Kumar | 2024-01-16 04:33:51 | Re: Synchronizing slots from primary to standby |