| From: | Denis Perchine <dyp(at)perchine(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Problem with updating system indices. |
| Date: | 2000-07-31 04:53:32 |
| Message-ID: | 0007311157290I.28220@dyp.perchine.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> > Relation idescs[Num_pg_index_indices];
> ^^^^^^^^
>
> Dunno whether you have Num_pg_largeobject_indices =
> Num_pg_index_indices, but in any case there's a latent
> stack clobber here.
Ough... That's bad to work too much...
> > CommandCounterIncrement();
>
> Are you sure it's a good idea to be incrementing the CC here?
> This seems like a pretty low-level routine, so there might be
> people further up the stack who do not want this done.
Hmmm... Problem is that if I did not do this I do not see this change
later when I do lo_create/lo_open inside transaction...
What should I use else for this purpose?
--
Sincerely Yours,
Denis Perchine
----------------------------------
E-Mail: dyp(at)perchine(dot)com
HomePage: http://www.perchine.com/dyp/
FidoNet: 2:5000/120.5
----------------------------------
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas Lockhart | 2000-07-31 05:26:01 | Re: pre-6.1-to-6.1 conversion procs slated for destruction |
| Previous Message | Philip Warner | 2000-07-31 03:20:15 | Re: pg_dump & performance degradation |