Re: preserving forensic information when we freeze

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Jim Nasby <jim(at)nasby(dot)net>
Subject: Re: preserving forensic information when we freeze
Date: 2014-01-02 08:48:26
Message-ID: 20140102084826.GA2683@awork2.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On 2014-01-02 05:26:26 +0000, Greg Stark wrote:
> 2) refetching a row could conceivably end up retrieving different data than
> was present when the row was originally read. (In some cases that might
> actually be the intended behaviour)

That's possible with system columns as well. In the normal cases we'll
only have copied the HeapTuple, not the HeapTupleHeader, so it will be
re-fetched from the (pinned) buffer.

> If this came up earlier I'm sorry but I suppose it's too hard to have a
> function like foo(tab.*) which magically can tell that the record is a heap
> tuple and look in the header? And presumably throw an error if passed a non
> heap tuple.

I don't see how that could be a good API. What happens if you have two
relations in a query?
Even if that wouldn't be a query, why would this be a helpful? Seems
like a poor reinvention of system columns.

Andres

PS: Could you not always include the full quoted message below your --
signature?

Greetings,

Andres Freund

Greetings,

Andres Freund

--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2014-01-02 08:53:34 Re: more psprintf() use
Previous Message Heikki Linnakangas 2014-01-02 07:49:48 Re: more psprintf() use