Re: [HACKERS] RE: Getting rid of setheapoverride (was Re: [COMMITTERS] heap.c) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [HACKERS] RE: Getting rid of setheapoverride (was Re: [COMMITTERS] heap.c)
Date
Msg-id 16364.948087333@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to RE: Getting rid of setheapoverride (was Re: [COMMITTERS] heap.c)  ("Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue@tpf.co.jp>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] RE: Getting rid of setheapoverride (was Re: [COMMITTERS] heap.c)
List pgsql-hackers
"Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue@tpf.co.jp> writes:
> Oh,I was just looking at heapoverride stuff quite accidentally. 
> Yes, this call is ugly and should be replaced by CommandCounterIncrement().

OK, I'm running a build now with setheapoverride calls removed.
Will see what happens.

About half of the setheapoverride calls surrounded heap_update()
(formerly called heap_replace()) calls.  AFAICS there is no need
for these calls unless heap_update itself needs them --- but there
are many calls to heap_update that do not have setheapoverride.
Perhaps heap_replace once needed setheapoverride but no longer does?

I am going to try just removing these calls without adding a
CommandCounterIncrement to replace them.  If anyone knows that
this is a bad idea, let me know!
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Kristofer Munn
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Temp Table Memory Leak
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump not in very good shape