Re: CompactCheckpointerRequestQueue versus pad bytes - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: CompactCheckpointerRequestQueue versus pad bytes
Date
Msg-id 13311.1342546003@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: CompactCheckpointerRequestQueue versus pad bytes  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: CompactCheckpointerRequestQueue versus pad bytes  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 9:58 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> BTW, I wonder whether the code that checks for relfilenode conflict
>> when selecting a pg_class or relfilenode OID tries both file naming
>> conventions?  If not, should we make it do so?

> I don't believe it does, nor do I see what we would gain by making it to do so.

What we would gain is ensuring that we aren't using the same relfilenode
for both a regular table and a temp table.  Do you really want to assume
that such a conflict is 100% safe?  It sounds pretty scary to me, and
even if we were sure the backend would never get confused, what about
client-side code that's looking at relfilenode?
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Covering Indexes
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: b-tree index search algorithms