Re: table AM option passing

On 2026-Apr-01, Antonin Houska wrote:

> I've reviewed this patch set too. The only question that occurs to me is
> whether INSERT_SKIP_FSM and INSERT_FROZEN shouldn't actually be prefixed with
> HEAP_, as these are rather low-level and thus might be considered
> AM-specific.

Thanks!  I pushed 0001 and 0002 from this patchset, with minimal
cosmetic corrections.

I realized that patch 0003 is doing two different things, and they
should each be their own patch which can be rejected if we don't like
them; so I split it in two.  One moves the heapam.h-private bit to the
32th bit.  The other removes the duplicity of definitions, so that
heapam.h doesn't have to feel it needs to redefine the tableam.h
interface.

At this point these patches could be considered WIP in the sense that I
wouldn't commit exactly as is (minor corrections might be appropriate,
for example to the nearby comments), but I would like to know opinions
in case we decide to just throw them away.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera        Breisgau, Deutschland  —  https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
"Las navajas y los monos deben estar siempre distantes"   (Germán Poo)