Re: Hot Standby, release candidate? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Hot Standby, release candidate?
Date
Msg-id 12261.1260818046@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Hot Standby, release candidate?  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>)
Responses Re: Hot Standby, release candidate?  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> writes:
> On Mon, 2009-12-14 at 13:48 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> writes:
>>> * Disallow clustering system relations.  This will definitely NOT work
>>> * for shared relations (we have no way to update pg_class rows in other
>>> * databases), nor for nailed-in-cache relations (the relfilenode values
>>> * for those are hardwired, see relcache.c).  It might work for other
>>> * system relations, but I ain't gonna risk it.
>> 
>>> I would presume we would not want to relax the restriction on CLUSTER
>>> working on these tables, even if new VACUUM FULL does.
>> 
>> Why not?  If we solve the problem of allowing these relations to change
>> relfilenodes, then CLUSTER would work just fine on them.  Whether it's
>> particularly useful is not ours to decide I think.

> I think you are probably right, but my wish to prove Schrodinger's Bug
> does not exist is not high enough for me personally to open that box
> this side of 8.6, especially when the previous code author saw it as a
> risk worth documenting. 

You're talking to the "previous code author" ... or at least I'm pretty
sure that comment is mine.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Heikki Linnakangas
Date:
Subject: Re: Streaming replication and non-blocking I/O
Next
From: Jeff Davis
Date:
Subject: Re: Range types