Re: Ignoring BRIN for HOT udpates seems broken - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: Ignoring BRIN for HOT udpates seems broken
Date
Msg-id Yp2stIzXEtU2frzb@paquier.xyz
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Ignoring BRIN for HOT udpates seems broken  (Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com>)
Responses Re: Ignoring BRIN for HOT udpates seems broken  (Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Jun 06, 2022 at 09:08:08AM +0200, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> Attached is a patch reverting both commits (5753d4ee32 and fe60b67250).
> This changes the IndexAmRoutine struct, so it's an ABI break. That's not
> great post-beta :-( In principle we might also leave amhotblocking in
> the struct but ignore it in the code (and treat it as false), but that
> seems weird and it's going to be a pain when backpatching. Opinions?

I don't think that you need to worry about ABI breakages now in beta,
because that's the period of time where we can still change things and
shape the code in its best way for prime time.  It depends on the
change, of course, but what you are doing, by removing the field,
looks right to me here.
--
Michael

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: should check interrupts in BuildRelationExtStatistics ?
Next
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: [RFC] building postgres with meson -v8