| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: changeset generation v5-01 - Patches & git tree |
| Date: | 2013-06-28 16:26:52 |
| Message-ID: | 10502.1372436812@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On the other hand, I can't entirely shake the feeling that adding the
> information into WAL would be more reliable.
That feeling has been nagging at me too. I can't demonstrate that
there's a problem when an ALTER TABLE is in process of rewriting a table
into a new relfilenode number, but I don't have a warm fuzzy feeling
about the reliability of reverse lookups for this. At the very least
it's going to require some hard-to-verify restriction about how we
can't start doing changeset reconstruction in the middle of a
transaction that's doing DDL.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nicholas White | 2013-06-28 16:29:37 | Re: Request for Patch Feedback: Lag & Lead Window Functions Can Ignore Nulls |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2013-06-28 16:14:15 | Re: Move unused buffers to freelist |