Re: Remaining beta blockers
От | Greg Stark |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Remaining beta blockers |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAM-w4HPHwbyuHwrj3E4sYzh4yQPz6bjdC=iJRTQyqSbWS78EQg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Remaining beta blockers (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Remaining beta blockers
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 5:49 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: > Yes, I think the big question is how much information do we want per > relation that we don't need in the system tables. It's not that we don't need it in the system tables. It's that there's some state that we *can't* have in the system tables because we need it to be accessible without access to the catalog or we need to be able to change it on a standby. But note that this all sounds very similar to the global temp table discussion a while ago. I think we're gong to need some infrastructure for table state that isn't transactional and it will make sense to solve that with something general that we can then depend on for lots of things. If I had to guess it would look more like a cached copy of the pg_class row or the whole relcache entry rather than an entirely independent structure. -- greg
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: