From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: pg_sequence_last_value() for unlogged sequences on standbys |
Date: | 2024-05-03 21:22:06 |
Message-ID: | 2746846.1714771326@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Wed, May 01, 2024 at 12:39:53PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> However, it seems to me that you should also drop the
>> pg_is_other_temp_schema() in system_views.sql for the definition of
>> pg_sequences. Doing that on HEAD now would be OK, but there's nothing
>> urgent to it so it may be better done once v18 opens up. Note that
>> pg_is_other_temp_schema() is only used for this sequence view, which
>> is a nice cleanup.
> IIUC this would cause other sessions' temporary sequences to appear in the
> view. Is that desirable?
I assume Michael meant to move the test into the C code, not drop
it entirely --- I agree we don't want that.
Moving it has some attraction, but pg_is_other_temp_schema() is also
used in a lot of information_schema views, so we couldn't get rid of
it without a lot of further hacking. Not sure we want to relocate
that filter responsibility in just one view.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | David Zhang | 2024-05-03 22:29:45 | Re: wrong comment in libpq.h |
Previous Message | Nathan Bossart | 2024-05-03 20:49:08 | Re: pg_sequence_last_value() for unlogged sequences on standbys |