On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 8:32 AM, Alexander Korotkov <a.korot...@postgrespro.ru> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 4:01 AM, Michael Paquier <michael.paqu...@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. > Then while saying that #1 is useful for > users, it would be nice to keep in mind particular storage AMs which can be > implemented using #1. I don't think anybody's arguing with that. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
