From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Brent Verner <brent(at)rcfile(dot)org> |
Cc: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Problem reloading regression database |
Date: | 2002-01-15 02:52:23 |
Message-ID: | 21602.1011063143@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Brent Verner <brent(at)rcfile(dot)org> writes:
> gotcha. No, I don't think anything inside that loop expects to
> persist across iterations. The attribute_buf is static to the
> file, and initialized in DoCopy.
There is more to attribute_buf than meets the eye ;-)
> What I ended up doing is switching to per-tuple-context prior to
> the input loop, then switching back to the (saved) query-context
> after exiting the loop. I followed ResetTupleExprContext back, and
> it doesn't seem to do anything that would require a switch per loop.
> Are there any problems this might cause that I'm not seeing with
> my test case?
I really don't feel comfortable with running heap_insert or the
subsequent operations in a per-tuple context. Have you tried any
test cases that involve triggers or indexes?
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Brent Verner | 2002-01-15 03:05:51 | Re: Problem reloading regression database |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2002-01-15 02:49:49 | Re: Theory about XLogFlush startup failures |