| From: | Xing GUO <higuoxing(at)gmail(dot)com> | 
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org | 
| Subject: | try_relation_open and relation_open behave different. | 
| Date: | 2021-10-18 05:56:07 | 
| Message-ID: | CACpMh+C00FnGkW=qPX7UQxSWh0Xhz-Nx5tJr+SpMjcmsUXDnJQ@mail.gmail.com | 
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email | 
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers | 
Hi hackers,
I'm writing an extension that employs `object_access_hook`. I want to
monitor the table creation event and record the mapping between `reloid`
and `relfilenode` during a transaction. Here's my code snippet,
```
static void
my_object_access_hook(ObjectAccessType access,
                      Oid classId,
                      Oid objectId,
                      int subId, void *arg)
{
    do_some_checks(access, classId, ...);
    // open the relation using relation_open
    rel = relation_open(objectId, AccessShareLock);
    // record the reloid and relfilenode.
    record(objectId, rel->rd_node);
    relation_close(rel, AccessShareLock);
}
```
However, when I replace the relation_open with try_relation_open, the
relation cannot be opened. I've checked the source code, it looks that
try_relation_open has an additional checker which causes the relation_open
and try_relation_open behavior different:
```
Relation
try_relation_open(Oid relationId, LOCKMODE lockmode)
{
    ...
    /*
     * Now that we have the lock, probe to see if the relation really exists
     * or not.
     */
    if (!SearchSysCacheExists1(RELOID, ObjectIdGetDatum(relationId)))
    {
        /* Release useless lock */
        if (lockmode != NoLock)
           UnlockRelationOid(relationId, lockmode);
        return NULL;
    }
    ...
}
```
My question is, is it a deliberate design that makes try_relation_open and
relation_open different? Shall we mention it in the comment of
try_relation_open OR adding the checker to relation_open?
Best Regards,
Xing
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2021-10-18 06:00:43 | Re: Data is copied twice when specifying both child and parent table in publication | 
| Previous Message | Bharath Rupireddy | 2021-10-18 05:41:58 | Re: can we add subscription TAP test option "vcregress subscriptioncheck" for MSVC builds? |