| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>, Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander(at)timescale(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: The documentation for READ COMMITTED may be incomplete or wrong |
| Date: | 2023-05-19 18:33:36 |
| Message-ID: | 281324.1684521216@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Fri, May 19, 2023 at 8:57 AM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> What I'm thinking about doing to back-patch this is to replace
>> one of the pointer fields in EPQState with a pointer to a
>> subsidiary palloc'd structure, where we can put the new fields
>> along with the cannibalized old one. We've done something
>> similar before, and it seems a lot safer than having basically
>> different logic in v16 than earlier branches.
> +1.
Done that way. I chose to replace the tuple_table field, because
it was in a convenient spot and it seemed like the field least
likely to have any outside code referencing it.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Aleksander Alekseev | 2023-05-19 18:42:50 | Re: The documentation for READ COMMITTED may be incomplete or wrong |
| Previous Message | Joseph Koshakow | 2023-05-19 17:22:12 | Re: Missing warning on revokes with grant options |