From: | Andreas Karlsson <andreas(at)proxel(dot)se> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Parallel safety tagging of extension functions |
Date: | 2016-05-31 01:37:20 |
Message-ID: | 574CEAD0.1070104@proxel.se |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 05/25/2016 03:37 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andreas Karlsson <andreas(at)proxel(dot)se> writes:
>> Ok, then I can avoid touching all functions which are only called by
>> operator classes, tsearch, pls, fdws, etc. Which also means that there
>> is no need to care about Tom's changes to the signatures of GIN and GiST
>> support functions.
>
> I think as long as you already did the work, we should keep those updates.
> I'm not totally convinced by Alexander's argument that those changes pose
> a future hazard, but I'm not convinced he's wrong either. If we're going
> to be bumping a lot of contrib module versions anyway, it'd be silly to
> take the risk that that's not a problem.
So how to best change the function signatures? I do not think it is
possible without locking indexes by just using the SQL commands. You
cannot drop a function from the operator family without dropping the
operator class first.
Is the correct solution to manually update pg_amop with a new value for
amopmethod?
Andreas
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andreas Karlsson | 2016-05-31 01:44:34 | Re: IPv6 link-local addresses and init data type |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2016-05-31 01:14:34 | Redesign of parallel dump/restore's response to SIGINT |