Re: our checks for read-only queries are not great

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: our checks for read-only queries are not great
Date: 2020-01-14 17:34:52
Message-ID: 11675.1579023292@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:
> Speaking of sensible progress, I think we've drifted off on a tangent
> here about ALTER SYSTEM.

Agreed, that's not terribly relevant for the proposed patch.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Fetter 2020-01-14 17:35:53 Use compiler intrinsics for bit ops in hash
Previous Message Robert Haas 2020-01-14 16:54:30 Re: backup manifests