From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)atentus(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: CLUSTER patch |
Date: | 2002-07-14 21:26:46 |
Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.44.0207141704270.21167-200000@cm-lcon1-46-187.cm.vtr.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-patches |
Tom Lane dijo:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)atentus(dot)com> writes:
> > It does indeed work. Actually, I tried to do that before, but the fact
> > that RelationFlushBuffers requires a firstDelBlock made me turn around.
>
> firstDelBlock should be 0, not length-of-relation; as given, this code
> fails to get rid of the buffer entries!
Oh, I failed to understand completely the purpose of firstDelBlock then.
Anyway, there's still a big problem with this patch: the pg_depend
information gets messed up after CLUSTER, so a clustered table cannot be
dropped. I don't know why is this.
As I said yesterday, I'm going on vacation tomorrow, and probably will
not fix this issue. I can look into it when I'm back, on two weeks.
I attach a little doc patch.
--
Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[a]atentus.com>)
"La gente vulgar solo piensa en pasar el tiempo;
el que tiene talento, en aprovecharlo"
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
cluster.doc.patch | text/plain | 2.3 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Gavin Sherry | 2002-07-14 23:57:19 | Re: [HACKERS] Non-standard feature request |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2002-07-14 19:55:11 | Re: CLUSTER patch |