Re: GetTransactionSnapshot() in enum.c
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: GetTransactionSnapshot() in enum.c |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+Tgmobzt30UE6uM4bO4=A-R9yJwW8tj7QiSwPEKVoLhquTn9Q@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: GetTransactionSnapshot() in enum.c (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 4:31 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: >> On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 1:41 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> BTW, I notice that the MVCC-catalog-scans patch summarily asserts that >>> RenumberEnumType no longer poses any concurrency hazards. I doubt that's >>> true: isn't it still possible that pg_enum rows acquired through the >>> syscaches will have inconsistent enumsortorder values, if they were >>> read at different times? If you want to examine enumsortorder, you really >>> need to be comparing rows you know were read with the *same* snapshot. > >> Good point, I missed that. Here's a proposed comment patch. > > Looks sane to me. Thanks for the review. Committed. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: