From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Commits 8de72b and 5457a1 (COPY FREEZE) |
Date: | 2012-12-22 00:42:43 |
Message-ID: | CA+U5nMLVchdSRFJg1D9sDLuHZ62JL+Py0d+XZz=_aPCZ4q3Hng@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 21 December 2012 20:10, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> wrote:
> I thought of one case where we do currently forget rd_newRelfilenodeSubid:
>
> BEGIN;
> TRUNCATE t;
> SAVEPOINT save;
> TRUNCATE t;
> ROLLBACK TO save;
That's a weird one. Aborting a subtransacton that sets it, when it was
already set.
The loss of rd_newRelfilenodeSubid in that case is deterministic, but
tracking the full complexity of multiple relations and multiple nested
subxids isn't worth the trouble for such rare cases [assumption].
I'd go for just setting an its_too_complex flag (with better name)
that we can use to trigger a message in COPY to say that FREEZE option
won't be honoured. That would then be completely consistent, rather
than the lack of deterministic behaviour that Robert rightly objects
to.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2012-12-22 00:49:42 | Re: Request for vote to move forward with recovery.conf overhaul |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2012-12-21 23:42:21 | Making view dump/restore safe at the column-alias level |