On Fri, Dec 25, 2020 at 8:10 AM Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 24, 2020 at 05:48:42AM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> > I'm not posting the updated 0002 to 0004 patches, I plan to do so
> > after a couple of reviews happen on the design of the APIs in 0001.
> >
> > Thoughts?
>
> Are you familiar with this work ?
>
> https://commitfest.postgresql.org/31/2717/
> Reloptions for table access methods
>
> It seems like that can be relevant for your patch, and I think some of what
> your patch needs might be provided by AM opts.
>
> It's difficult to generalize AMs when we have only one, but your use-case might
> be a concrete example which would help to answer some questions on the other
> thread.
>
> @Jeff: https://commitfest.postgresql.org/31/2871/
Note that I have not gone through the entire thread at [1]. On some
initial study, that patch is proposing to allow different table AMs to
have custom rel options.
In the v2 patch that I sent upthread [2] for new table AMs has heap AM
multi insert code moved inside the new heap AM implementation and I
don't see any need of having rel options. In case, any other AMs want
to have the control for their multi insert API implementation via rel
options, I think the proposal at [1] can be useful.
IIUC, there's no dependency or anything as such for the new table AM
patch with the rel options thread [1]. If I'm right, can this new
table AM patch [2] be reviewed further?
Thoughts?
[1] - https://commitfest.postgresql.org/31/2717/
[2] -
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CALj2ACWMnZZCu%3DG0PJkEeYYicKeuJ-X%3DSU19i6vQ1%2B%3DuXz8u0Q%40mail.gmail.com
With Regards,
Bharath Rupireddy.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com