Re: pg_get_indexdef() modification to use TxnSnapshot
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pg_get_indexdef() modification to use TxnSnapshot |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 2869995.1696561880@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pg_get_indexdef() modification to use TxnSnapshot (kuroda.keisuke@nttcom.co.jp) |
Ответы |
Re: pg_get_indexdef() modification to use TxnSnapshot
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
kuroda.keisuke@nttcom.co.jp writes: > On 2023-06-14 15:31, vignesh C wrote: >> I have attempted to convert pg_get_indexdef() to use >> systable_beginscan() based on transaction-snapshot rather than using >> SearchSysCache(). Has anybody thought about the fact that ALTER TABLE ALTER TYPE (specifically RememberIndexForRebuilding) absolutely requires seeing the latest version of the index's definition? >>> it would be going to be a large refactoring and potentially make the >>> future implementations such as pg_get_tabledef() etc hard. Have you >>> considered changes to the SearchSysCache() family so that they >>> internally use a transaction snapshot that is registered in advance. A very significant fraction of other SearchSysCache callers likewise cannot afford to see stale data. We might be able to fix things so that the SQL-accessible ruleutils functionality works differently, but we can't just up and change the behavior of cache lookups everywhere. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: