Re: In-placre persistance change of a relation - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andres Freund
Subject Re: In-placre persistance change of a relation
Date
Msg-id 20201111221804.cs3kbhypjmui2aiy@alap3.anarazel.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to In-placre persistance change of a relation  (Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: In-placre persistance change of a relation
List pgsql-hackers
Hi,

I suggest outlining what you are trying to achieve here. Starting a new
thread and expecting people to dig through another thread to infer what
you are actually trying to achive isn't great.

FWIW, I'm *extremely* doubtful it's worth adding features that depend on
a PGC_POSTMASTER wal_level=minimal being used. Which this does, a far as
I understand.  If somebody added support for dynamically adapting
wal_level (e.g. wal_level=auto, that increases wal_level to
replica/logical depending on the presence of replication slots), it'd
perhaps be different.


On 2020-11-11 17:33:17 +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> FWIW this is a revised version of the PoC, which has some known
> problems.
> 
> - Flipping of Buffer persistence is not WAL-logged nor even be able to
>   be safely roll-backed. (It might be better to drop buffers).

That's obviously a no-go. I think you might be able to address this if
you accept that the command cannot be run in a transaction (like
CONCURRENTLY). Then you can first do the catalog changes, change the
persistence level, and commit.

Greetings,

Andres Freund



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Stephen Frost
Date:
Subject: Re: Allow matching whole DN from a client certificate
Next
From: Mark Dilger
Date:
Subject: Tracking cluster upgrade and configuration history