Re: [HACKERS] WAL logging problem in 9.4.3? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [HACKERS] WAL logging problem in 9.4.3?
Date
Msg-id 27309.1491611915@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] WAL logging problem in 9.4.3?  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] WAL logging problem in 9.4.3?  (Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp>)
List pgsql-hackers
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> Interesting.  I wonder if it's possible that a relcache invalidation
> would cause these values to get lost for some reason, because that would
> be dangerous.

> I suppose the rationale is that this shouldn't happen because any
> operation that does things this way must hold an exclusive lock on the
> relation.  But that doesn't guarantee that the relcache entry is
> completely stable,

It ABSOLUTELY is not safe.  Relcache flushes can happen regardless of
how strong a lock you hold.
        regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] partitioned tables and contrib/sepgsql
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Partitioned tables vs GRANT