Re: Reaping Temp tables to avoid XID wraparound

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Cc: Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk>, "Tsunakawa, Takayuki" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>, James Sewell <james(dot)sewell(at)jirotech(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Reaping Temp tables to avoid XID wraparound
Date: 2019-03-09 01:28:55
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Mar 08, 2019 at 11:14:46AM -0800, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 10:45 PM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
> wrote:
>> One problem that I can see with your patch is that you would set the
>> XID once any temporary object created, including when objects other
>> than tables are created in pg_temp, including functions, etc. And it
>> does not really matter for wraparound monitoring. Still, the patch is
>> simple..
> I'm not entirely sure what you mean here. Sure, it will log it even when a
> temp function is created, but the namespace is still created then is it
> not?

What I mean here is: imagine the case of a session which creates a
temporary function, creating as well the temporary schema, but creates
no other temporary objects. In this case we don't really care about
the wraparound issue because, even if we have a temporary schema, we
do not have temporary relations. And this could confuse the user?
Perhaps that's not worth bothering, still not all temporary objects
are tables.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Dunstan 2019-03-09 01:29:14 Re: Should we increase the default vacuum_cost_limit?
Previous Message Haribabu Kommi 2019-03-09 01:19:43 Re: pg_basebackup ignores the existing data directory permissions