From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(dot)dunstan(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Subject: | Re: Relax transactional restrictions on ALTER ENUM ... ADD TYPE (redux) |
Date: | 2018-10-05 13:31:18 |
Message-ID: | 9903ec08-7448-21a7-1188-a87b4024f3d7@2ndQuadrant.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 10/03/2018 12:02 AM, Thomas Munro wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 3, 2018 at 4:42 PM Thomas Munro
> <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 3, 2018 at 2:24 PM Thomas Munro
>> <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>>> Over the thread for bug #14825 I posted some draft code to show one
>>> way to save/restore the enum blacklist for parallel workers. Here's a
>>> better version, and a new thread. 0001 is the code by Andrew Dustan
>>> and Tom Lane that was reverted in 93a1af0b, unchanged by me except for
>>> resolving trivial conflicts on current master. 0002 fixes the failure
>>> seen with make installcheck when postgresql.conf says
>>> force_parallel_mode = regress.
>> Added to the next commitfest.
> ... which promptly caused cfbot to report that the documentation
> doesn't build anymore, because it used one of those old "</>" tags
> that are now outlawed. Fixed.
>
Many thanks for doing this. Your solution seems simpler and cleaner that
what was previously proposed.
I have tested it, and confirm that without your 0002 patch there is an
error with force_parallel_mode=regress and with 0002 that error goes away.
cheers
andrew
--
Andrew Dunstan https://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2018-10-05 13:56:35 | Re: now() vs transaction_timestamp() |
Previous Message | Konstantin Knizhnik | 2018-10-05 13:29:28 | now() vs transaction_timestamp() |