On Mon, Apr 8, 2024 at 9:54 PM Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 8, 2024 at 12:33 PM Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Yes, it was my mistake. I got rushing trying to fit this to FF, even doing significant changes just before commit.
> > I'll revert this later today.
It appears to be a non-trivial revert, because 041b96802e already
revised the relation analyze after 27bc1772fc. That is, I would need
to "backport" 041b96802e. Sorry, I'm too tired to do this today.
I'll come back to this tomorrow.
> Alexander,
>
> Exactly how much is getting reverted here? I see these, all since March 23rd:
>
> dd1f6b0c17 Provide a way block-level table AMs could re-use
> acquire_sample_rows()
> 9bd99f4c26 Custom reloptions for table AM
> 97ce821e3e Fix the parameters order for
> TableAmRoutine.relation_copy_for_cluster()
> 867cc7b6dd Revert "Custom reloptions for table AM"
> b1484a3f19 Let table AM insertion methods control index insertion
> c95c25f9af Custom reloptions for table AM
> 27bc1772fc Generalize relation analyze in table AM interface
> 87985cc925 Allow locking updated tuples in tuple_update() and tuple_delete()
> c35a3fb5e0 Allow table AM tuple_insert() method to return the different slot
> 02eb07ea89 Allow table AM to store complex data structures in rd_amcache
It would be discouraging to revert all of this. Some items are very
simple, some items get a lot of work. I'll come back tomorrow and
answer all your points.
------
Regards,
Alexander Korotkov