> On Jun 16, 2022, at 12:27 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
>
>> I don't think I should have to do so. It's like saying, "I think I should
>> have freedom of speech", and you say, "well, I'm not sure about that; tell
>> me what you want to say, and I'll decide if I'm going to let you say it".'
>>
> On Jun 16, 2022, at 12:28 AM, David G. Johnston
> wrote:
>
> But you are basically proposing a reworking of the existing system into one
> that makes pretty much any SQL Command something that a TAM can treat as
> being an optional request by the user;
Yes, and I think I'm perfectly
On Wed, Jun 15, 2022 at 11:23 PM Mark Dilger
wrote:
>
> > On Jun 15, 2022, at 8:50 PM, David G. Johnston <
> david.g.johns...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 15, 2022 at 8:18 PM Andres Freund
> wrote:
> > > If a simple callback like
> > > relation_supports_cluster(Relation rel) is too
Hi,
On 2022-06-15 22:23:36 -0700, Mark Dilger wrote:
> I'm not entirely against you on that, but it makes me cringe that we impose
> design decisions like that on any and all future TAMs. It seems better to
> me to let the TAM author decide to emit an error, warning, notice, or
> whatever, as
> On Jun 15, 2022, at 8:50 PM, David G. Johnston
> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2022 at 8:18 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> > If a simple callback like
> > relation_supports_cluster(Relation rel) is too simplistic
>
> Seems like it should be called:
>
> On Jun 15, 2022, at 8:18 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 2022-06-15 20:10:30 -0700, Mark Dilger wrote:
>>> On Jun 15, 2022, at 7:30 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
But it's up to the TAM what it wants to do with that boolean, if in fact it
does anything at all based on that. A
On Wed, Jun 15, 2022 at 8:18 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> > If a simple callback like
> > relation_supports_cluster(Relation rel) is too simplistic
>
Seems like it should be called:
relation_supports_compaction[_by_removal_of_interspersed_dead_tuples]
Basically, if the user tells the table to
Hi,
On 2022-06-15 20:10:30 -0700, Mark Dilger wrote:
> > On Jun 15, 2022, at 7:30 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> >> But it's up to the TAM what it wants to do with that boolean, if in fact it
> >> does anything at all based on that. A TAM could decide to do the exact
> >> opposite of what Heap-AM
> On Jun 15, 2022, at 7:30 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>
>> It's effectively a synonym which determines whether the "bool use_sort"
>> parameter of the table AM's relation_copy_for_cluster will be set. Heap-AM
>> plays along and sorts or not based on that.
>
> Hardly a synonym if it behaves
Hi,
On 2022-06-15 19:21:42 -0700, Mark Dilger wrote:
> > On Jun 15, 2022, at 7:14 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2022-06-15 19:07:50 -0700, Mark Dilger wrote:
> >>> On Jun 15, 2022, at 6:55 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I think nothing would happen in this case - only pre-clustered
> On Jun 15, 2022, at 7:21 PM, Mark Dilger wrote:
>
>> If a user does that for a table that doesn't support clustering, well, I
>> don't
>> see what's gained by not erroring out.
>
> Perhaps they want to give the TAM information about which index to use for
> sorting, on those occasions
> On Jun 15, 2022, at 7:14 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 2022-06-15 19:07:50 -0700, Mark Dilger wrote:
>>> On Jun 15, 2022, at 6:55 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>>>
>>> I think nothing would happen in this case - only pre-clustered tables get
>>> clustered in an argumentless CLUSTER.
Hi,
On 2022-06-15 19:07:50 -0700, Mark Dilger wrote:
> > On Jun 15, 2022, at 6:55 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> >
> > I think nothing would happen in this case - only pre-clustered tables get
> > clustered in an argumentless CLUSTER. What am I missing?
>
> The "VACUUM FULL" synonym of "CLUSTER"
> On Jun 15, 2022, at 6:55 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>
> I think nothing would happen in this case - only pre-clustered tables get
> clustered in an argumentless CLUSTER. What am I missing?
The "VACUUM FULL" synonym of "CLUSTER" doesn't depend on whether the target is
pre-clustered, and both
Hi,
On 2022-06-15 18:24:45 -0700, Mark Dilger wrote:
> > On Jun 15, 2022, at 6:01 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2022-06-15 17:21:56 -0700, Mark Dilger wrote:
> >> While developing various Table Access Methods, I have wanted a callback for
> >> determining if CLUSTER (and VACUUM FULL) should be
> On Jun 15, 2022, at 6:01 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 2022-06-15 17:21:56 -0700, Mark Dilger wrote:
>> While developing various Table Access Methods, I have wanted a callback for
>> determining if CLUSTER (and VACUUM FULL) should be run against a table
>> backed by a given TAM.
Hi,
On 2022-06-15 17:21:56 -0700, Mark Dilger wrote:
> While developing various Table Access Methods, I have wanted a callback for
> determining if CLUSTER (and VACUUM FULL) should be run against a table
> backed by a given TAM. The current API contains a callback for doing the
> guts of the
Hackers,
While developing various Table Access Methods, I have wanted a callback for
determining if CLUSTER (and VACUUM FULL) should be run against a table backed
by a given TAM. The current API contains a callback for doing the guts of the
cluster, but by that time, it's a bit too late to
18 matches
Mail list logo
