Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: and it's not a bunny rabbit, either

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: and it's not a bunny rabbit, either
Date: 2010-12-29 17:49:19
Message-ID: 25335.1293644959@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> Hmm, I believe the idea of heap_open is to check that the relation is 
> backed by a heap that you can read with heap_beginscan+heap_next. At the 
> moment that includes normal tables, sequences and toast tables. Foreign 
> tables would not fall into that category.

I don't believe that that definition is documented anyplace; if we
decide that's what we want it to mean, some code comments would be in
order.

> Yeah, you're right that most of the callers of heap_open actually want 
> to a tighter check than that.

I think probably most of the physical calls of heap_open are actually
associated with system catalog accesses, and the fact that the code says
heap_open not relation_open has got more to do with copy&paste than any
real thought about what we're specifying.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: David FetterDate: 2010-12-29 17:50:25
Subject: Re: pg_streamrecv for 9.1?
Previous:From: Heikki LinnakangasDate: 2010-12-29 17:29:23
Subject: Re: and it's not a bunny rabbit, either

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group