Re: forcing a rebuild of the visibility map - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: forcing a rebuild of the visibility map
Date
Msg-id 13521.1466265411@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: forcing a rebuild of the visibility map  (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: forcing a rebuild of the visibility map  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
List pgsql-hackers
Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> writes:
> On Sat, Jun 18, 2016 at 6:53 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Andres, do you want to explain the nature of your concern further?

> I am not in his mind, but my guess is that contrib modules are
> sometimes used as template examples by other people, and encouraging
> users to use those routines in modules would increase the risk to
> misuse them, aka badly-formed records that could corrupt the system.

I don't follow that argument.  People writing new extensions are just
as likely to copy from core code as contrib.

If Andres' concern is that XLogInsert isn't a very stable API, maybe
we could address that by providing some wrapper function that knows
how to emit the specific kind of record that pg_visibility needs.
But on the whole it seems like make-work, unless there's a reason
to believe that other extensions will need to generate that exact
same record type.
        regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [BUGS] BUG #14199: The pg_ctl status check on server start is not compatible with the silent_mode=on
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Questionabl description in datatype.sgml