Re: Database-level collation version tracking

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Database-level collation version tracking
Date: 2022-02-09 11:48:35
Message-ID: 53b309c4-22c2-c781-5a54-ee4d824e8478@enterprisedb.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 08.02.22 13:55, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> I'm just saying that without such a lock you can easily trigger the "cache
> lookup" error, and that's something that's supposed to happen with normal
> usage I think. So it should be a better message saying that the database has
> been concurrently dropped, or actually simply does not exist like it's done in
> AlterDatabaseOwner() for the same pattern:
>
> [...]
> tuple = systable_getnext(scan);
> if (!HeapTupleIsValid(tuple))
> ereport(ERROR,
> (errcode(ERRCODE_UNDEFINED_DATABASE),
> errmsg("database \"%s\" does not exist", dbname)));
> [...]

In my code, the existence of the database is checked by

dboid = get_database_oid(stmt->dbname, false);

This also issues an appropriate user-facing error message if the
database does not exist.

The flow in AlterDatabaseOwner() is a bit different, it looks up the
pg_database tuple directly from the name. I think both are correct. My
code has been copied from the analogous code in AlterCollation().

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ashutosh Sharma 2022-02-09 12:01:02 Re: Make mesage at end-of-recovery less scary.
Previous Message Ranier Vilela 2022-02-09 11:15:45 Possible uninitialized use of the variables (src/backend/access/transam/twophase.c)