Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] BUG #14825: enum type: unsafe use?
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] BUG #14825: enum type: unsafe use? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+TgmobfvQzP6qnnYVBR1vojDmutsbu3yzbCEtgCA0YC__bz-w@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] BUG #14825: enum type: unsafe use? (Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] BUG #14825: enum type: unsafe use?
Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] BUG #14825: enum type: unsafe use? |
Список | pgsql-bugs |
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 11:01 PM, Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > Are you saying we should do the work now to create a per-transaction > DSM segment + DSA area + thing that every backend attaches to? No, I was just thinking you could stuff it into the per-parallel-query DSM/DSA. But... > I didn't think creating backend local hash tables would be a problem > because it's a vanishingly rare occurrence for the hash table to be > created at all (ie when you've altered an enum), and if created, to > have more than a couple of entries in it. ...this is also a fair point. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: