Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> [ blink... ] Doesn't look like that should happen. What is your
>> test case?
> Hmph, must be because of the patch from last winter to prevent
> relfilenode reuse until next checkpoint.
Ah. I had misunderstood Alvaro to say that temp files (the kind under
discussion up to now) were not unlinked immediately; which would be
pretty strange given that fd.c is underneath md.c.
> Looks like we didn't make an
> exception for temporary tables. Although it's harmless, we could put an
> isTempOrToastNamespace() test in there:
Bad, bad idea to have md.c doing any catalog access. As already noted
downthread, it wouldn't buy much anyway.
regards, tom lane
