On 18 November 2013 07:50, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas@vmware.com> wrote:
> It doesn't go far enough, it's still too *low*-level. The sequence AM
> implementation shouldn't need to have direct access to the buffer page at
> all.
> I don't think the sequence AM should be in control of 'cached'. The caching
> is done outside the AM. And log_cnt probably should be passed to the _alloc
> function directly as an argument, ie. the server code asks the AM to
> allocate N new values in one call.
I can't see what the rationale of your arguments is. All index Ams
write WAL and control buffer locking etc..
Do you have a new use case that shows why changes should happen? We
can't just redesign things based upon arbitrary decisions about what
things should or should not be possible via the API.
-- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
