| From: | Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)BlueTreble(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: emergency outage requiring database restart |
| Date: | 2016-10-22 17:13:06 |
| Message-ID: | 16162ffe-ae5c-772d-8bd4-aacbf864f1e7@BlueTreble.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 10/21/16 7:43 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
>> Jim Nasby wrote:
>>> It occurs to me that it might be worth embedding the relation name in the
>>> free space of the first block. Most people would never notice the missing 64
>>> bytes, but it would be incredibly helpful in cases like this...
>
>> Agreed. The problem is how to install it without breaking pg_upgrade.
It can't look up relation names?
> Well, that's the first problem. The second problem is how to cope with
> RENAME TABLE.
If the name was only encoded in the first block of the relation I'm not
sure how bad this would be; are there any facilities to change the name
back on a rollback?
--
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX
Experts in Analytics, Data Architecture and PostgreSQL
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com
855-TREBLE2 (855-873-2532) mobile: 512-569-9461
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2016-10-22 17:38:30 | Re: emergency outage requiring database restart |
| Previous Message | Ashutosh Bapat | 2016-10-22 16:46:10 | Re: Push down more full joins in postgres_fdw |