Re: DropRelFileNodeBuffers API change (was Re: [BUGS] BUG #5599: Vacuum fails due to index corruption issues)

From: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: DropRelFileNodeBuffers API change (was Re: [BUGS] BUG #5599: Vacuum fails due to index corruption issues)
Date: 2010-08-15 20:48:34
Message-ID: 4C6852A2.70503@enterprisedb.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers

On 15/08/10 21:58, Tom Lane wrote:
> Does anyone have an opinion whether it's likely that any third-party
> code is calling DropRelFileNodeBuffers directly?

I doubt it. External modules shouldn't be modifying relations at such a
low level.

--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2010-08-15 21:17:50 Re: DropRelFileNodeBuffers API change (was Re: [BUGS] BUG #5599: Vacuum fails due to index corruption issues)
Previous Message Tom Lane 2010-08-15 18:58:10 DropRelFileNodeBuffers API change (was Re: [BUGS] BUG #5599: Vacuum fails due to index corruption issues)

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2010-08-15 21:10:00 Re: LockDatabaseObject vs. LockSharedObject
Previous Message Tom Lane 2010-08-15 20:12:55 Re: assertions and constraint triggers