Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc> writes:
> Jim C. Nasby wrote:
>> On Sun, Jul 30, 2006 at 11:44:44AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> The path of least resistance might just be to not run these tests in
>>> parallel. The chance of this issue causing problems in the real world
>>> seems small.
>> It doesn't seem that unusual to want to rename an index on a running
>> system, and it certainly doesn't seem like the kind of operation that
>> should pose a problem. So at the very least, we'd need a big fat warning
>> in the docs about how renaming an index could cause other queries in the
>> system to fail, and the error message needs to be improved.
> it is my understanding that Tom is already tackling the underlying issue
> on a much more general base ...
Done in HEAD, but we might still wish to think about changing the
regression tests in the back branches, else we'll probably continue to
see this failure once in a while ...
regards, tom lane
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Jim Buttafuoco||Date: 2006-07-31 20:16:17|
|Subject: ERROR: could not open relation with OID 909391158|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2006-07-31 19:10:20|
|Subject: Re: [HACKERS] 8.2 features? |