Postgres Pro
Downloads
Home   >   mailing lists

Re: [RFC] Should smgrtruncate() avoid sending sinval message for temp relations - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [RFC] Should smgrtruncate() avoid sending sinval message for temp relations
Date
Msg-id 472.1407800430@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [RFC] Should smgrtruncate() avoid sending sinval message for temp relations  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [RFC] Should smgrtruncate() avoid sending sinval message for temp relations
Re: [RFC] Should smgrtruncate() avoid sending sinval message for temp relations
List pgsql-hackers
Tree view 
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 10:30 AM, MauMau <maumau307@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I've tracked down the real root cause.  The fix is very simple.  Please
>> check the attached one-liner patch.

> I'd support back-porting that commit to 9.1 and 9.2 as a fix for this
> problem.  As the commit message says, it's dead simple.

While I have no great objection to back-porting Heikki's patch, it seems
like a very large stretch to call this a root-cause fix.  At best it's
band-aiding one symptom in a rather fragile way.
        regards, tom lane

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tomas Vondra
Date:
Subject: Re: bad estimation together with large work_mem generates terrible slow hash joins
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: failures on barnacle (CLOBBER_CACHE_RECURSIVELY) because of memory leaks