On Mon, Apr 8, 2024 at 9:54 PM Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 8, 2024 at 12:33 PM Alexander Korotkov <aekorot...@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
