From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Aidan Van Dyk <aidan(at)highrise(dot)ca>, Joshua Tolley <eggyknap(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Thoughts on pg_hba.conf rejection |
Date: | 2010-04-20 21:51:14 |
Message-ID: | t2v603c8f071004201451m3028171bp64cd4a3aa261950c@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 5:02 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 2:24 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>> 3. We'd have to nail pg_authid, pg_auth_members, and their indexes into
>>> relcache, because relcache.c isn't prepared to cope otherwise. I doubt
>>> this would affect performance in any material way, but it would eat a
>>> few more kbytes of storage per backend.
>
>> Hmm, I'm not sure I understand why this is necessary or what our other
>> options are.
>
> relcache.c assumes that "critical" relations (those for which we have
> hard-wired descriptors in schemapg.h) are always nailed-in-cache. In
> the general case this is necessary because we'd not be able to rebuild
> the cache entry if it got discarded; eg, without a pg_class entry you're
> dead in the water. It's possible we could decouple these attributes;
> for instance develop a notion of being nailed only until authentication
> finishes, or something like that. I'm not thinking it's worth it
> though.
Well that just begs the question - why do we need a hard-wired
descriptor? Presumably we should only need to hard-wired descriptors
for the relations are used by the relcache code itself to build more
descriptors - so clearly pg_cache and pg_attribute, but beyond that I
don't get it. In particular, I can't see any reason why we couldn't
just build the descriptor for pg_authid etc. by scanning pg_class and
pg_attribute.
...Robert
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2010-04-20 22:12:36 | Re: Thoughts on pg_hba.conf rejection |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2010-04-20 21:43:14 | Re: Thoughts on pg_hba.conf rejection |