From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Inconsistencies between dependency.c and objectaddress.c |
Date: | 2019-02-14 16:43:05 |
Message-ID: | 19935.1550162585@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
In <26527(dot)1549572789(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> I speculated about adding a
function to objectaddress.c that would probe to see if an object
with a given ObjectAddress (still) exists. I started to implement
this, but soon noticed that objectaddress.c doesn't cover all the
object classes that dependency.c knows. This seems bad; is there
a reason for it? The omitted object classes are
AccessMethodOperatorRelationId
AccessMethodProcedureRelationId
AttrDefaultRelationId
DefaultAclRelationId
PublicationRelRelationId
UserMappingRelationId
What's potentially a lot worse, the two subsystems do not agree
as to the object class OID to be used for large objects:
dependency.c has LargeObjectRelationId but what's in objectaddress.c
is LargeObjectMetadataRelationId. How did we get to that, and why
isn't it causing serious problems?
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dmitry Dolgov | 2019-02-14 16:45:33 | Re: libpq compression |
Previous Message | Sergei Kornilov | 2019-02-14 16:36:55 | Re: pg11.1: dsa_area could not attach to segment |