Hi hackers,
> As a matter of fact, I think the patch I suggested is the right approach:
> let me elaborate on why.
> [...]
> It is straightforward to replace it by implementing the Table AM methods
> above, but we are missing a callback on dropping the table. If we have that,
> we can record the table-to-be-dropped in a similar manner to how the heap AM
> does it and register a transaction callback using RegisterXactCallback.
Since no one objected in 5 months, I assume Mats made a good point. At least,
personally, I can't argue.
The patch looks good to me except for the fact that comments seem to be
inaccurate in light of the discussion. The corrected patch is attached.
I'm going to mark it as "Ready for Committer" unless anyone objects.
--
Best regards,
Aleksander Alekseev
