Re: [RFC] Should smgrtruncate() avoid sending sinval message for temp relations

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "MauMau" <maumau307(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Should smgrtruncate() avoid sending sinval message for temp relations
Date: 2014-07-23 15:08:36
Message-ID: 29607.1406128116@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"MauMau" <maumau307(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> Looking at smgrtruncate(), the sinval message is sent even when the
> truncated relation is a temporary relation. However, I think the sinval
> message is not necessary for temp relations, because each session doesn't
> see the temp relations of other sessions.

This seems like a pretty unsafe suggestion, because the smgr level doesn't
know or care whether relations are temp; files are files. In any case it
would only paper over one specific instance of whatever problem you're
worried about, because sinval messages definitely do need to be sent in
general.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Simon Riggs 2014-07-23 15:35:13 Re: Production block comparison facility
Previous Message Rohit Goyal 2014-07-23 15:01:12 Least Active Transaction ID function