Re: MaxOffsetNumber for Table AMs - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jeff Davis
Subject Re: MaxOffsetNumber for Table AMs
Date
Msg-id 75e094cdd9b1be5bae0ac1fca166fb882734c920.camel@j-davis.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: MaxOffsetNumber for Table AMs  (Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>)
Responses Re: MaxOffsetNumber for Table AMs
Re: MaxOffsetNumber for Table AMs
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, 2021-05-05 at 10:48 -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> What we have right now has little chance of failing. It also has
> little chance of succeeding (except for something like zheap, which
> can presumably get by with the heapam's idea of TID).

What has little chance of succeeding? Table AMs?

And why isn't columnar an example of someting that can "get by with
heapam's idea of TID"? I mean, it's not a perfect fit, but my primary
complaint this whole thread is that it's undefined, not that it's
completely unworkable.

Regards,
    Jeff Davis





pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: MaxOffsetNumber for Table AMs
Next
From: "David G. Johnston"
Date:
Subject: Re: COPY table_name (single_column) FROM 'iso-8859-1.txt' DELIMITER E'\n'