Teodor Sigaev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> to use it when the AM can't guarantee to return the same sequence of
>> tuples after backing up. So I think it would be sufficient to have
>> gistmarkpos et al throw error if called.
> Why not to remove gistrestrpos/gistmarkpos/ginrestrpos/ginmarkpos from pg_am
> table?
First, because that would mean adding code to the indexam.c functions to
avoid crashing, and second because then we'd have to force initdb to
change our minds about this. I think having stub functions that throw
errors, rather than no catalog entry at all, is cheap future-proofing.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
