Re: MaxOffsetNumber for Table AMs
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: MaxOffsetNumber for Table AMs |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+TgmoaxuJPGWJY2pWikmnvwZ-W0QCGgoULdF8FhspT17o8UMQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: MaxOffsetNumber for Table AMs (Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: MaxOffsetNumber for Table AMs
Re: MaxOffsetNumber for Table AMs |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, May 5, 2021 at 1:13 PM Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com> wrote: > "In core" shouldn't matter. In fact, if it's in core, stability of the > APIs is much less important. I don't know what to say here. I think it's unrealistic to believe that a very new API that has only 1 in-core user is going to be fully stable, or that we can know how it might evolve. I can understand why you and probably other people want that, but if somebody figures out a way to make some part of core significantly better and it requires changing that API, they're going to change the API, not give up on the idea. -- Robert Haas EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: