Re: TABLESAMPLE patch is really in pretty sad shape - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Amit Langote
Subject Re: TABLESAMPLE patch is really in pretty sad shape
Date
Msg-id CA+HiwqGBF+tCbv8_Q3HpRSpOkG45b6NovTPBjJ_qN+P7sj_CtQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: TABLESAMPLE patch is really in pretty sad shape  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: TABLESAMPLE patch is really in pretty sad shape
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 10:33 PM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> Petr Jelinek wrote:
>> On 2015-07-13 00:36, Tom Lane wrote:
>
>> >PS: now that I've written this rant, I wonder why we don't redesign the
>> >index AM API along the same lines.  It probably doesn't matter much at
>> >the moment, but if we ever get serious about supporting index AM
>> >extensions, I think we ought to consider doing that.
>>
>> +1
>>
>> I think this is very relevant to the proposed sequence am patch as well.
>
> Hmm, how would this work?  Would we have index AM implementation run
> some function that register their support methods somehow at startup?
> Hopefully we're not going to have the index AMs become shared libraries.
>

I recall a proposal by Alexander Korotkov about extensible access
methods although his proposal also included a CREATE AM command that
would add a pg_am row so that perhaps differs from what Tom seems to
allude to here.

http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAPpHfdsXwZmojm6Dx+TJnpYk27kT4o7Ri6X_4OSWcByu1Rm+VA@mail.gmail.com

Thanks,
Amit



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: TABLESAMPLE patch is really in pretty sad shape
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] postgres_fdw extension support