Re: Compressed TOAST Slicing
Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>
From: Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org,
Paul Ramsey <pramsey@cleverelephant.ca>, Regina Obe <r@pcorp.us>
Date: 2019-03-13T10:09:35Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Commits
Same data as JSON:
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Add support for partial TOAST decompression
- 4d0e994eed83 12.0 landed
-
Remove remaining hard-wired OID references in the initial catalog data.
- 3aa0395d4ed3 12.0 cited
-
Rephrase references to "time qualification".
- ebcc7bf949ba 12.0 cited
On 3/13/19 3:19 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 07:01:17PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote: >> I don't think this is even close to popular enough to incur the >> maybe of a separate function / more complicated interface. By this >> logic we can change basically no APIs anymore. > > Well, if folks here think that it is not worth worrying about, I won't > cry on that either. If only the original API is kept, could it just > be possible to make it extensible with some bits16 flags then? Adding > only a boolean is not really appealing. In my experience "extensible" APIs with bitmasks are terrible - it's a PITA to both use them and maintain stuff that calls them. That is not to say there is no use for that design pattern, or that I like API breaks. But I very much prefer when an API change breaks things, alerting me of places that may require attention. And I'm with Andres here about the complexity being rather unwarranted here - I don't think we've changed pglz API in years (if ever), so what is the chance we'd actually benefit from the extensibility soon? regards -- Tomas Vondra http://www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services