Re: a modest improvement to get_object_address()

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: a modest improvement to get_object_address()
Date: 2011-11-09 15:03:55
Message-ID: CA+TgmoayUh8HC1MLHVhEX73cC=9BECrqQXwMRNuMaNrRGM_v+Q@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 9:54 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> I'd like to propose the attached patch, which changes
>> get_object_address() in a manner similar to what we did in
>> RangeVarGetRelid() in commit 4240e429d0c2d889d0cda23c618f94e12c13ade7.
>
> I would think you need to drop the now-useless lock, and I sure hope
> that RangeVarGetRelid does likewise.

It doesn't currently. The now-useless lock doesn't really hurt
anything, aside from taking up space in the lock table. But we can
certainly make it (and this) do that, if you think it's worth the
extra lines of code.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2011-11-09 15:12:25 Re: Concurrent CREATE TABLE/DROP SCHEMA leaves inconsistent leftovers
Previous Message Tom Lane 2011-11-09 14:54:47 Re: a modest improvement to get_object_address()