| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> | 
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> | 
| Cc: | Qingqing Zhou <zhouqq(dot)postgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> | 
| Subject: | Re: Planner debug views | 
| Date: | 2015-07-28 20:01:51 | 
| Message-ID: | 27070.1438113711@sss.pgh.pa.us | 
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email | 
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers | 
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> Qingqing Zhou wrote:
>> The file name is not random, it is fixed so we can create foreign table
>> once and use it afterwards - I actually want to push them into
>> system_views.sql.
> Got that.  That seems fragile and not very convenient; I don't think
> forcing retries until no concurrent writers were using the same file is
> convenient at all.  When you need this facility the most, which is
> during slow planner runs, it is more likely that somebody else will
> overwrite your file.
FWIW, I would be very much against anything that requires going through
the filesystem for this.  That will create security/privilege issues that
we should not want to introduce, quite aside from the usability problems
Alvaro points out.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2015-07-28 20:07:46 | Re: Re: Removing SSL renegotiation (Was: Should we back-patch SSL renegotiation fixes?) | 
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2015-07-28 20:01:30 | Re: Remaining 'needs review' patchs in July commitfest |