From: | Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: missing toast table for pg_policy |
Date: | 2018-02-19 16:33:30 |
Message-ID: | 92ccd0c7-3a77-a9b8-cc5a-426fa657beee@joeconway.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 02/18/2018 01:33 PM, Joe Conway wrote:
> On 02/18/2018 11:18 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I'm fairly suspicious of toasting anything that the toast mechanism itself
>> depends on, actually, and that would include at least pg_attribute and
>> pg_index as well as pg_class. Maybe we could get away with it because
>> there would never be any actual recursion only potential recursion ...
>> but it seems scary.
>
> Well that is the other approach we could pursue -- instead of justifying
> which system catalogs need toast tables we could create an exclusion
> list of which ones should not have toast tables, with the current
> candidates being pg_class, pg_attribute, and pg_index.
The attached does exactly this. Gives all system tables toast tables
except pg_class, pg_attribute, and pg_index, and includes cat version
bump and regression test in misc_sanity.
Any further discussion, comments, complaints?
Joe
--
Crunchy Data - http://crunchydata.com
PostgreSQL Support for Secure Enterprises
Consulting, Training, & Open Source Development
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
toastable-catalogs-02.diff | text/x-patch | 6.1 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Mark Wong | 2018-02-19 17:00:41 | Re: pgbench - allow to specify scale as a size |
Previous Message | Tomas Vondra | 2018-02-19 16:00:34 | Re: autovacuum: change priority of the vacuumed tables |