Re: WIP: Access method extendability - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andres Freund
Subject Re: WIP: Access method extendability
Date
Msg-id 20141028175124.GE5873@awork2.anarazel.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: WIP: Access method extendability  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 2014-10-28 13:37:33 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> I'm not at all sold on the idea that we need to support dropping AMs.
> I think it'd be fine to consider that installing an AM into a given
> database is a one-way operation.  Then you just need to insert some
> pg_depend entries that "pin" the AM's individual functions, and you're
> done.

I think that'd be somewhat ugly. An extension adding such a AM would
then either actively need to block dropping (e.g. by pinned entries, as
you mention) or do rather odd things on recreation. I think that'd be
dropping our own standards.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

-- Andres Freund                       http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training &
Services



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: WIP: Access method extendability
Next
From: Jim Nasby
Date:
Subject: Re: WIP: Access method extendability