| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | prlw1(at)cam(dot)ac(dot)uk, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: failed runcheck |
| Date: | 2000-10-22 05:26:07 |
| Message-ID: | 2809.972192367@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
>> Next question: why is RelationInitLockInfo using
>> RelationGetPhysicalRelationName to get the input data for
>> IsSharedSystemRelationName --- shouldn't that be a test on logical
>> relation name? Or maybe the entire premise of
>> IsSharedSystemRelationName is bogus now, and we ought to use some other
>> way to decide if a relation is cross-database or not?
> No, because if they create a temp table that masks a system table in the
> current session, you want the physical name so it can know if it is a
> real system table, or a temp/fake one.
Well, you clearly don't want to be fooled by temp relations. I was
sorta visualizing a check based on relation OIDs instead of names...
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Denis Perchine | 2000-10-22 06:30:56 | Re: Re: [PATCHES] Patch to support transactions with BLOBs for current CVS |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2000-10-22 05:16:39 | Re: failed runcheck |