Re: Sequence Access Method WIP
Petr Jelinek <petr@2ndquadrant.com>
From: Petr Jelinek <petr@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>
Cc: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>,
Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>,
PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>,
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
Date: 2015-04-20T10:26:15Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 20/04/15 12:05, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2015-04-20 12:49:39 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: >> With the patch, pg_class.relam column references to the pg_seqam table for >> sequences, but pg_indexam for indexes. I believe it's the first instance >> where we reuse a "foreign key" column like that. It's not a real foreign >> key, of course - that wouldn't work with a real foreign key at all - but >> it's a bit strange. That makes me a bit uncomfortable. How do others feel >> about that? > > Hm. I'd modeled it more as an extension of the 'relkind' column > mentally. I.e. it further specifies how exactly the relation is > behaving. Given that the field has been added to pg_class and not > pg_index, combined with it not having index in its name, makes me think > that it actually was intended to be used the way it's done in the patch. > That's how I think about it too. It's also short for access method, nothing really suggests to me that it should be index specific by design. -- Petr Jelinek http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
Commits
-
Add missing gss option to msvc config template
- 3063e7a84026 9.6.0 cited