Re: ALTER TABLE lock strength reduction patch is unsafe

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: ALTER TABLE lock strength reduction patch is unsafe
Date: 2012-01-02 19:54:33
Message-ID: CA+U5nMJeavFtk9N4w-a6Sd0W7scmH=aweY+YwO1B2HGmVLdfAQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 7:49 PM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Excerpts from Noah Misch's message of lun ene 02 16:39:09 -0300 2012:
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 02, 2012 at 04:33:28PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
>> > Uh, I thought detoasting had its own visibility test function .. I mean,
>> > otherwise, what is HeapTupleSatisfiesToast for?
>>
>> The SnapshotNow scan was actually to build the relcache entry for the toast
>> table before scanning the toast table itself.  Stack trace:
>
> Oh, right, that makes sense.

Certainly does. Thanks Noah, much appreciated.

--
 Simon Riggs                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Pavel Stehule 2012-01-02 20:05:39 Re: SQL:2011 features
Previous Message Simon Riggs 2012-01-02 19:53:28 Re: our buffer replacement strategy is kind of lame