Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> > I'm not sure I follow. Are you suggesting adding a new function,
> > similar to pg_class_ownercheck, which additionally checks for temp-ness?
> No, I was just suggesting adding the check for temp-ness in cluster()
> and cluster_rel() where we do pg_class_ownercheck. We already have the
> rel open there and so it's cheap to do the temp-ness check.
I applied a patch along these lines to HEAD and 8.2.
I am unsure if I should backpatch to 8.1: the code in cluster.c has
changed, and while it is relatively easy to modify the patch, this is a
rare bug and nobody has reported it in CLUSTER (not many people clusters
temp tables, it seems). Should I patch only REINDEX? How far back?
Alvaro Herrera http://www.amazon.com/gp/registry/5ZYLFMCVHXC
"The eagle never lost so much time, as
when he submitted to learn of the crow." (William Blake)
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Avery Payne||Date: 2007-09-10 22:16:10|
|Subject: Re: A Silly Idea for Vertically-Oriented Databases|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2007-09-10 21:35:19|
|Subject: Re: ispell dictionary broken in CVS HEAD ? |
pgsql-admin by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2007-09-11 00:20:12|
|Subject: Re: reindexdb hangs |
|Previous:||From: Brian Staszewski||Date: 2007-09-10 18:25:01|
|Subject: Close open transactions soon to avoid wraparound problems|