| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: --single-transaction hack to pg_upgrade does not work |
| Date: | 2012-12-01 17:01:17 |
| Message-ID: | 50BA37DD.4000800@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 12/01/2012 11:38 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2012-12-01 17:36:20 +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
>> On 2012-12-01 17:03:03 +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
>>> Could we possibly allow adding enum values to a type which was just created in
>>> this transaction? That shouldn't be too hard. At least easier than providing
>>> the capability to pre-assign the next N oids...
>> The attached patch does just that. Its *not* ready yet though, as it
>> will be apparent for everyone who reads it ;)
>>
>> To really make that work in a reliable manner we would probably need
>> an rd_createSubid for typcache entries instead of testing xmin as I have
>> done here?
Does this actually get you over the problem identified in the comment?:
* We disallow this in transaction blocks, because we can't cope
* with enum OID values getting into indexes and then having their
* defining pg_enum entries go away.
cheers
andrew
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2012-12-01 17:05:32 | Re: --single-transaction hack to pg_upgrade does not work |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2012-12-01 17:00:46 | Re: --single-transaction hack to pg_upgrade does not work |