| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Greg Sabino Mullane <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: unnailing shared relations (was Re: global temporary tables) |
| Date: | 2010-05-24 21:37:04 |
| Message-ID: | 1274736935-sup-4829@alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of lun may 24 17:18:21 -0400 2010:
> On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 4:23 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> wrote:
> > Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of vie may 21 10:20:38 -0400 2010:
> > Uh, how does this work when you change the entries for shared relations
> > in a database-specific pg_class? Keeping everything in sync seems hard,
> > if not impossible.
>
> Well, I might be missing something here, but pg_class already IS
> database-specific. If you change anything very significant about a
> shared rel in one copy of pg_class today, you're toast, IIUC. This
> proposal doesn't make that any better, but I don't think it makes it
> any worse either.
I thought the whole point of this exercise was precisely to avoid this
sort of problem.
--
Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dave Page | 2010-05-24 21:38:44 | Re: pg_upgrade docs |
| Previous Message | Jan Wieck | 2010-05-24 21:25:55 | Re: Exposing the Xact commit order to the user |