Re: forcing a rebuild of the visibility map
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: forcing a rebuild of the visibility map |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 13521.1466265411@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: forcing a rebuild of the visibility map (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: forcing a rebuild of the visibility map
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> writes: > On Sat, Jun 18, 2016 at 6:53 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: >> Andres, do you want to explain the nature of your concern further? > I am not in his mind, but my guess is that contrib modules are > sometimes used as template examples by other people, and encouraging > users to use those routines in modules would increase the risk to > misuse them, aka badly-formed records that could corrupt the system. I don't follow that argument. People writing new extensions are just as likely to copy from core code as contrib. If Andres' concern is that XLogInsert isn't a very stable API, maybe we could address that by providing some wrapper function that knows how to emit the specific kind of record that pg_visibility needs. But on the whole it seems like make-work, unless there's a reason to believe that other extensions will need to generate that exact same record type. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: