Re: [HACKERS] Pluggable storage - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Pluggable storage
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmobWe0xTtbf7Qx9dgC3dqLKtbx9k-8PJ+AOHJrwHEooang@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Pluggable storage  (Kuntal Ghosh <kuntalghosh.2007@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Pluggable storage
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 5:25 AM, Kuntal Ghosh
<kuntalghosh.2007@gmail.com> wrote:
> For some other
> storage engine, if we maintain the older version in different storage,
> undo for example, and don't require a new index entry, should we still
> call it HOT-chain?

I would say, emphatically, no.  HOT is a creature of the existing
heap.  If it's creeping into storage APIs they are not really
abstracted from what we have currently.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Improve catcache/syscache performance.
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Pluggable storage