Re: [HACKERS] Pluggable storage

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Alexander Korotkov
Тема Re: [HACKERS] Pluggable storage
Дата
Msg-id CAPpHfdty4V3XnKTpHA9ZKyh4MGbSqp8WyQh=pep4FWuBUOtGKA@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [HACKERS] Pluggable storage  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: [HACKERS] Pluggable storage
Список pgsql-hackers
Дерево обсуждения
On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 5:27 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 8:32 AM, Alexander Korotkov
<a.korotkov@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 4:01 AM, Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> Putting that in a couple of words.
>> 1. Table AM with a 6-byte TID.
>> 2. Table AM with a custom locator format, which could be TID-like.
>> 3. Table AM with no locators.
>>
>> Getting into having #1 first to work out would already be really
>> useful for users.
>
> What exactly would be useful for *users*?  Any kind of API itself is
> completely useless for users, because they are users, not developers.
> Storage API could be useful for developers to implement storage AMs whose in
> turn could be useful for users.

What's your point?  I assume that is what Michael meant.

TBH, I don't understand what particular enchantments do we expect from having #1.
This is why it's hard for me to say if #1 is good idea.  It's also hard for me to say if patch upthread is right way of implementing #1.
But, I have gut feeling that if even #1 is good idea itself, it's definitely not what users expect from "pluggable storages".
From user side, it would be normal to expect that "pluggable storage" could be index-organized table where index could be say LSM...

------
Alexander Korotkov
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company 

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: