Re: Parallel safety tagging of extension functions

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Andreas Karlsson <andreas(at)proxel(dot)se>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Parallel safety tagging of extension functions
Date: 2016-05-23 16:22:32
Message-ID: 30592.1464020552@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Sat, May 21, 2016 at 6:16 PM, Andreas Karlsson <andreas(at)proxel(dot)se> wrote:
>> My immediate thought is first doing an UPDATE of pg_proc and then updating
>> the catcache with CREATE OR REPLACE with the new arguments. Does that work?
>> Is there a less ugly way to accomplish this?

> Isn't it better to just drop and recreate the function? pageinspect
> did so for example for heap_page_items in 1.4 to update its OUT
> arguments.

You'd have to alter the index opfamily to disconnect the function from it,
drop/recreate the function, then re-add it to the opfamily. Kind of icky,
but probably better than the alternatives.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2016-05-23 16:41:14 Re: [sqlsmith] PANIC: failed to add BRIN tuple
Previous Message Merlin Moncure 2016-05-23 16:05:01 Re: Inheritance