From: | Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: missing toast table for pg_policy |
Date: | 2018-02-17 15:18:58 |
Message-ID: | bb8b90b3-af44-3520-49cf-214a5930695c@joeconway.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 02/16/2018 05:24 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> writes:
>> On 02/16/2018 05:07 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>>> If problematic for < master users I think you'll have to restart cluster
>>> with allow_system_table_mods, manually create/drop toasted column. IIRC
>>> that should add a toast table even after dropping.
>
>> I wasn't sure if we would want to backpatch and put the manual procedure
>> steps into the release notes.
>
> The example you give seems like pretty bad practice to me. I don't think
> we should back-patch unless it's possible to trigger the problem with a
> more realistic policy expression.
Fair enough, but the origin of this was a real life-based complaint.
> (Also, one can always work around it by putting the complicated condition
> into a function, which would likely be a better idea anyway from a
> maintenance standpoint.)
Yes, exactly. I'm fine with not backpatching, just wanted to raise the
possibility. I will push later today to HEAD (with a catalog version bump).
Joe
--
Crunchy Data - http://crunchydata.com
PostgreSQL Support for Secure Enterprises
Consulting, Training, & Open Source Development
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2018-02-17 16:26:23 | Re: pgbench - allow to specify scale as a size |
Previous Message | Fabien COELHO | 2018-02-17 14:50:22 | Re: pgbench - allow to specify scale as a size |