On 2 March 2016 at 00:03, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> True. There is an API, though, and having pluggable WAL support seems
> desirable too. At the same time, I don't think we know of anyone
> maintaining a non-core index AM ... and there are probably good
> reasons for that. We end up revising the index AM API pretty
> regularly every time somebody wants to do something new, so it's not
> really a stable API that extensions can just tap into. I suspect that
> a transaction manager API would end up similarly situated.
IMO that needs to be true of all hooks into the real innards.
The ProcessUtility_hook API changed a couple of times after introduction
and nobody screamed. I think we just have to mark such places as having
cross-version API volatility, so you should be prepared to #if
PG_VERSION_NUM around them if you use them.
Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services