Gregory Stark wrote: > Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > >> The original design of Postgres allowed pluggable index access methods, >> but that capability has not been brought forward to allow for WAL. This >> patch would bridge that gap. > > Well I think what people do is what GIST did early on -- they just don't > support recoverability until they get merged into core.
What other constraints are there on such non-in-core indexex? Early (2005) GIST indexes were very painful in production environments because vacuuming them held locks for a *long* time (IIRC, an hour or so on my database) on the indexes locking out queries. Was that just a shortcoming of the implementation, or was it a side-effect of them not supporting recoverability. If the latter, I think that's a good reason to try to avoid developing new index types the same way the GIST guys did. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
