Re: Documentation fixes for pg_visibility
| От | Robert Haas |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Documentation fixes for pg_visibility |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CA+TgmoZvMR5yC1izmVM4V+Qqpo6AcHod0wer9=k4nsCu08Dvdw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Documentation fixes for pg_visibility (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Documentation fixes for pg_visibility
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 12:53 AM, Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 1:46 PM, Michael Paquier > <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 1:42 PM, Michael Paquier >> <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote: >>> While looking at the module I found two mistakes in the docs: >>> pg_visibility_map and pg_visibility *not* taking in input a block >>> number are SRFs, and return a set of records. The documentation is >>> just listing them with "returns record". A patch is attached. >> >> And that: s/PD_ALL_VISIBILE/PD_ALL_VISIBLE. > > And would it actually make sense to have pg_check_frozen(IN regclass, > IN blkno) to target only a certain page? Same for pg_check_visible. It > would take a long time to run those functions on large tables as they > scan all the pages of a relation at once.. Under what circumstances would you wish to check only one page of a relation? -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: