From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Roma Sokolov <sokolov(dot)r(dot)v(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Женя Зайцев <zevlg(at)yandex(dot)ru> |
Subject: | Re: [PATCH] fix DROP OPERATOR to reset links to itself on commutator and negator |
Date: | 2016-03-23 17:41:52 |
Message-ID: | 10336.1458754912@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 12:27 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> I'm also a bit dubious of the assumption in RemoveOperatorById that an
>> operator can't be its own negator. Yeah, that should not be the case,
>> but if it is the case the deletion will fail outright.
> So what? We've never guaranteed that things are going to work if you
> start by corrupting the catalogs, and I wouldn't pick this as a place
> to start.
I would not be worried except that it breaks a case that used to work,
as your test below demonstrates.
>> We could resolve both of these issues by changing the semantics of
>> OprUpdate so that it unconditionally does a CommandCounterIncrement
>> after each update that it performs. IMO that would be a lot simpler
>> and more bulletproof; it'd allow removal of a lot of these
>> overly-tightly-reasoned cases.
> I tried this, but it did not seem to work.
Odd. If you post the revised patch, I'll try to chase down what's wrong.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Vladimir Sitnikov | 2016-03-23 17:46:05 | Re: NOT EXIST for PREPARE |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2016-03-23 17:37:28 | Re: PostgreSQL 9.6 behavior change with set returning (funct).* |