Re: Remaining beta blockers
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Remaining beta blockers |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 10366.1367092314@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Remaining beta blockers (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Remaining beta blockers
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: > On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 3:33 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> Um, wait, it's *not* in pg_class now, and what I was about to do was >> go put it there. Is there a typo in the above para, or are you saying >> you don't like either approach? If the latter, what concept have you >> got for an eventual implementation? > If we're going to have it at all, I'd like to make it a flag in the > page header on page 0, or maybe have a dedicated metapage that stores > that detail, and perhaps other things. I cannot say that I find that idea attractive; the biggest problem with it being that updating such a state flag will be nontransactional, unless we go to a lot of effort to support rollbacks. ISTM that the scannability property is a perfectly normal relation property and as such *ought* to be in the pg_class row, or at worst some other catalog entry. Why do you think differently? regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: