From: | Ashutosh Sharma <ashu(dot)coek88(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Truncation of mapped catalogs (whether local or shared) leads to server crash |
Date: | 2024-06-18 14:28:26 |
Message-ID: | CAE9k0PmcmN=hJJ+W5G53+JZPgYWrWQYMa=uynY_P3ZeNQzq4bA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On Tue, Jun 18, 2024 at 7:50 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > On Tue, Jun 18, 2024 at 8:10 AM Ashutosh Sharma <ashu(dot)coek88(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >> Executing below commands:
> >> -- set allow_system_table_mods TO on;
> >> -- truncate table pg_type;
>
> > If the operation isn't allowed without turning on
> > allow_system_table_mods, that means that doing it is probably a bad
> > idea and will probably break stuff, as happened here.
>
> Nothing good can come of truncating *any* core system catalog --- what
> do you think you'll still be able to do afterwards?
>
> I think the assertion you noticed is there because the code path gets
> traversed during REINDEX, which is an operation we do support on
> system catalogs. I have zero interest in making truncate work
> on them.
>
I agree with you on that point. How about considering a complete
restriction instead?
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Maxim Orlov | 2024-06-18 14:29:13 | Re: Maybe don't process multi xmax in FreezeMultiXactId() if it is already marked as invalid? |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2024-06-18 14:22:49 | Re: CompilerWarnings task does not catch C++ warnings |