Re: Isn't init_irels() dangerous ?

Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> "Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
>>>> It seems that init_irels() should be called after
>>>> InitializeTransactionSystem() was called.
>>
>> Can we just swap the order of the RelationCacheInitialize() and
>> InitializeTransactionSystem() calls in InitPostgres? If that
>> works, I'd have no objection.

> It doesn't work. InitializeTransactionSystem() requires
> pg_log/pg_variable relations which are already built in
> RelationCacheInitialize().

OK. Second proposal: do the init_irels() call in
RelationCacheInitializePhase2(). I've just looked through the
other stuff that's done in between, and I don't think any of it
needs valid relcache entries.

> In the meantime,I have another anxiety. init_irels()
> (RelationCacheInitialize()) seems to be called while
> Locking is disabled.

This should fix that problem, too.

regards, tom lane