| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Hiroshi Inoue" <inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Cc: | "'Bruce Momjian'" <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, "'Marc G(dot) Fournier'" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-committers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: pgsql-server/src/backend catalog/index.c comma ... |
| Date: | 2003-09-26 00:04:08 |
| Message-ID: | 5428.1064534648@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
"Hiroshi Inoue" <inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
>> Remove the 'index deactivation' code, since it provides
>> no useful protection in the shared- index case.
> Seems a funny reason to me.
Well, as you know I never liked that code; modifying permanent on-disk
data didn't seem like a sensible way to protect against intra-transaction
interlock problems. So when I saw a chance to get rid of it, I thought
we should take it.
> I've spent a pretty much time only to put back your change.
Why? As far as I know, the modified code does everything you want.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2003-09-26 01:17:02 | pgsql-server/src/backend/executor nodeTidscan.c |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-09-25 23:02:12 | pgsql-server/src backend/executor/execQual.c b ... |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Hornyak Laszlo | 2003-09-26 00:18:48 | Re: [ADMIN] postgres 6.2 vacuum |
| Previous Message | Greg Sabino Mullane | 2003-09-25 23:31:43 | ctid matching behavior changed? |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Aleksander Kmetec | 2003-09-26 05:20:46 | psql translation |
| Previous Message | Hiroshi Inoue | 2003-09-25 15:33:21 | Re: pgsql-server/src/backend catalog/index.c comma ... |