Re: foreign key locks

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Erik Rijkers <er(at)xs4all(dot)nl>, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)mail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: foreign key locks
Date: 2013-01-18 21:01:18
Message-ID: 693.1358542878@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On 2013-01-18 15:37:47 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I doubt it ever came up before. What use is logging only the content of
>> a buffer page? Surely you'd need to know, for example, which relation
>> and page number it is from.

> It only got to be a length of 0 because the the data got removed due to
> a logged full page write. And the backup block contains the data about
> which blocks it is logging in itself.

And if the full-page-image case *hadn't* been invoked, what then? I
still don't see a very good argument for xlog records with no fixed
data.

> I wonder if the check shouldn't just check write_len instead, directly
> below the loop that ads backup blocks.

We're not changing this unless you can convince me that the read-side
error check mentioned in the comment is useless.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Boszormenyi Zoltan 2013-01-18 21:07:40 Re: Re: Proposal for Allow postgresql.conf values to be changed via SQL [review]
Previous Message Boszormenyi Zoltan 2013-01-18 20:48:25 Re: Re: Proposal for Allow postgresql.conf values to be changed via SQL [review]