| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Recursive use of syscaches (was: relation ### modified while in use) |
| Date: | 2000-11-10 01:04:11 |
| Message-ID: | 2589.973818251@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
> My concern is the robustness of rel cache.
> It seems pretty dangerous to discard system relation
> descriptors used for cache mechanism especially in
> case of error recovery.
> It also seems pretty dangerous to recontruct relation
> descriptors especially in case of error recovery.
Why? We are able to construct all the non-nailed relcache entries
from scratch during backend startup. That seems a sufficient
proof that we can reconstruct any or all of them on demand.
Until the changes I made today, there was a flaw in that logic,
namely that the specific order that relcache entries are built in
during startup might be somehow magic, ie, building them in another
order might cause a recursive syscache call. But now, that doesn't
matter.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alfred Perlstein | 2000-11-10 01:04:30 | 7.0.2 dies when connection dropped mid-transaction |
| Previous Message | Hiroshi Inoue | 2000-11-10 00:56:39 | Re: Recursive use of syscaches (was: relation ### modified while in use) |