Re: Introduce new multi insert Table AM and improve performance of various SQL commands with it for Heap AM
От | Alvaro Herrera |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Introduce new multi insert Table AM and improve performance of various SQL commands with it for Heap AM |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 202405150914.q2hc2cl2eqzf@alvherre.pgsql обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Introduce new multi insert Table AM and improve performance of various SQL commands with it for Heap AM (Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Introduce new multi insert Table AM and improve performance of various SQL commands with it for Heap AM
Re: Introduce new multi insert Table AM and improve performance of various SQL commands with it for Heap AM Re: Introduce new multi insert Table AM and improve performance of various SQL commands with it for Heap AM |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Sorry to interject, but -- On 2024-May-15, Bharath Rupireddy wrote: > It looks like with the use of the new multi insert table access method > (TAM) for COPY (v20-0005), pgbench regressed about 35% [1]. Where does this acronym "TAM" comes from for "table access method"? I find it thoroughly horrible and wish we didn't use it. What's wrong with using "table AM"? It's not that much longer, much clearer and reuses our well-established acronym AM. We don't use IAM anywhere, for example (it's always "index AM"), and I don't think we'd turn "sequence AM" into SAM either, would we? -- Álvaro Herrera Breisgau, Deutschland — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: