Horton

Re: Table AM Interface Enhancements

Pavel Borisov <pashkin.elfe@gmail.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Pavel Borisov <pashkin.elfe@gmail.com>
To: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com>
Cc: Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>, Japin Li <japinli@hotmail.com>, Mark Dilger <mark.dilger@enterprisedb.com>, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Date: 2024-04-07T19:15:00Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Attachments

Hi, Alexander!

On Sun, 7 Apr 2024 at 12:34, Pavel Borisov <pashkin.elfe@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi, Alexander!
>
> On Sun, 7 Apr 2024 at 07:33, Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi, Pavel!
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 5, 2024 at 6:58 PM Pavel Borisov <pashkin.elfe@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 at 19:17, Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, 2024-04-02 at 11:49 +0300, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
>> >> > I don't like the idea that every custom table AM reltoptions should
>> >> > begin with StdRdOptions.  I would rather introduce the new data
>> >> > structure with table options, which need to be accessed outside of
>> >> > table AM.  Then reloptions will be a backbox only directly used in
>> >> > table AM, while table AM has a freedom on what to store in reloptions
>> >> > and how to calculate externally-visible options.  What do you think?
>> >>
>> >> Hi Alexander!
>> >>
>> >> I agree with all of that. It will take some refactoring to get there,
>> >> though.
>> >>
>> >> One idea is to store StdRdOptions like normal, but if an unrecognized
>> >> option is found, ask the table AM if it understands the option. In that
>> >> case I think we'd just use a different field in pg_class so that it can
>> >> use whatever format it wants to represent its options.
>> >>
>> >> Regards,
>> >>         Jeff Davis
>> >
>> > I tried to rework a patch regarding table am according to the input
>> from Alexander and Jeff.
>> >
>> > It splits table reloptions into two categories:
>> > - common for all tables (stored in a fixed size structure and could be
>> accessed from outside)
>> > - table-am specific (variable size, parsed and accessed by access
>> method only)
>>
>> Thank you for your work.  Please, check the revised patch.
>>
>> It makes CommonRdOptions a separate data structure, not directly
>> involved in parsing the reloption.  Instead table AM can fill it on
>> the base of its reloptions or calculate the other way.  Patch comes
>> with a test module, which comes with heap-based table AM.  This table
>> AM has "enable_parallel" reloption, which is used as the base to set
>> the value of CommonRdOptions.parallel_workers.
>>
> To me, a patch v10 looks good.
>
> I think the comment for RelationData now applies only to rd_options, not
> to rd_common_options.
> >NULLs means "use defaults".
>
> Regards,
> Pavel
>

I made minor changes to the patch. Please find v11 attached.

Regards,
Pavel.

Commits

  1. Remove extra comment at TableAmRoutine.scan_analyze_next_block

  2. revert: Generalize relation analyze in table AM interface

  3. Revert: Allow table AM to store complex data structures in rd_amcache

  4. Revert: Allow table AM tuple_insert() method to return the different slot

  5. Revert: Allow locking updated tuples in tuple_update() and tuple_delete()

  6. Revert: Let table AM insertion methods control index insertion

  7. Revert: Custom reloptions for table AM

  8. Provide a way block-level table AMs could re-use acquire_sample_rows()

  9. Custom reloptions for table AM

  10. Use streaming I/O in ANALYZE.

  11. Revert "Custom reloptions for table AM"

  12. Let table AM insertion methods control index insertion

  13. Generalize relation analyze in table AM interface

  14. Improve error message for tts_(virtual|minimal)_is_current_xact_tuple

  15. Add comments on some MinimalTupleSlots methods usage

  16. Add TupleTableSlotOps.is_current_xact_tuple() method

  17. Allow table AM tuple_insert() method to return the different slot

  18. Allow table AM to store complex data structures in rd_amcache