From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: pg_sequence_last_value() for unlogged sequences on standbys |
Date: | 2024-05-04 09:45:32 |
Message-ID: | ZjYDvGuHaf_Cx5Pb@paquier.xyz |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, May 03, 2024 at 05:22:06PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> IIUC this would cause other sessions' temporary sequences to appear in the
>> view. Is that desirable?
>
> I assume Michael meant to move the test into the C code, not drop
> it entirely --- I agree we don't want that.
Yup. I meant to remove it from the script and keep only something in
the C code to avoid the duplication, but you're right that the temp
sequences would create more noise than now.
> Moving it has some attraction, but pg_is_other_temp_schema() is also
> used in a lot of information_schema views, so we couldn't get rid of
> it without a lot of further hacking. Not sure we want to relocate
> that filter responsibility in just one view.
Okay.
--
Michael
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2024-05-04 09:47:22 | Re: pg_sequence_last_value() for unlogged sequences on standbys |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2024-05-04 09:20:32 | Re: pg17 issues with not-null contraints |