From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: including PID or backend ID in relpath of temp rels |
Date: | 2010-05-04 22:34:27 |
Message-ID: | u2w603c8f071005041534v84afe6b1w3e11b0fd48ec5d0c@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 5:12 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> One possible thing we might do (bearing in mind that we might need to
>> wall off access at multiple levels) would be to forbid creating a
>> relcache entry for a non-local temprel. That would, in turn, forbid
>> doing pretty much anything to such a relation, although I'm not sure
>> what else would get broken in the process.
>
> Dropping temprels left behind by a crashed backend would get broken by
> that; which is a deal-breaker, because we have to be able to clean those
> up.
Phooey. It was such a good idea in my head.
...Robert
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2010-05-04 22:53:33 | Re: max_standby_delay considered harmful |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2010-05-04 21:17:10 | Re: including PID or backend ID in relpath of temp rels |