> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org
> [mailto:owner-pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org]On Behalf Of Tom Lane
> Sent: Sunday, November 21, 1999 11:12 AM
> To: Bruce Momjian
> Cc: PostgreSQL HACKERS
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] New regression driver
>
>
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > ... I have also added code to SearchSelfReferences()
> > because pg_operator has some fancy depency on its lookup using an index,
> > and has to have certain lookup happen with an sequential and not an
> > index scan.
>
> Say what? That's got to be a symptom of a bug somewhere. Maybe
> pg_operator needs some CommandCounterIncrement calls so that the
> tuples it inserts become visible earlier? What are you seeing exactly?
>
> For that matter, SearchSelfReferences looks like one giant kluge to me.
> Who added this, and why, and what's the logic? (Undocumented kluges
> are very high on my hate list.)
>
It's me who added the function.
I left it undocumented,sorry.
Bruce,could you add an document on it ?
Bruce added a new index to pg_index.
Index scan needs an information of pg_index.
If we use the new index,we needs the information about the index
in pg_index.
Doesn't this cause a real cycle ?
I added the function in order to hold one tuple which causes a real
cycle. The tuple in pg_index should be scanned sequentially.
I don't think it's the best solution.
Please change it if there's a better way.
Regards.
Hiroshi Inoue
Inoue@tpf.co.jp
