2010/1/27 KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>:
> Hmm, indeed, this logic (V3/V5) is busted.
> The idea of V4 patch can also handle this case correctly, although it
> is lesser in performance.
> I wonder whether it is really unacceptable cost in performance, or not.
> Basically, I assume ALTER TABLE RENAME/TYPE is not frequent operations,
> and I don't think this bugfix will damage to the reputation of PostgreSQL.
> Where should we go on the next?
Isn't the problem here just that the following comment is 100% wrong?
* Unlike find_all_inheritors(), we need to walk on
* that have diamond inheritance tree, because this
function has to
* return correct expected inhecount to the caller.
It seems to me that the right solution here is to just add one more
argument to find_all_inheritors(), something like List
Am I missing something?
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2010-01-28 15:46:47|
|Subject: Re: pgsql: Define INADDR_NONE on Solaris when it's missing. |
|Previous:||From: Tim Bunce||Date: 2010-01-28 15:46:12|
|Subject: Add on_perl_init and proper destruction to plperl