bgwriter, inherited temp tables TODO items? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Thomas F. O'Connell
Subject bgwriter, inherited temp tables TODO items?
Date
Msg-id 65EA2FDD-D98E-4844-8D78-E91E47613634@sitening.com
Whole thread Raw
Responses Re: bgwriter, inherited temp tables TODO items?  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
I'm switching the aftermath of this thread -- http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2005-07/msg00501.php -- to -hackers since it raised issues of potential concern to developers.

At various points in the thread, Tom Lane said the following:

"I have an old note to myself that persistent write errors could "clog"
the bgwriter, because I was worried that after an error it would
stupidly try to write the same buffer again instead of trying to make
progress elsewhere.  (CVS tip might be better about this, I'm not sure.)
A dirty buffer for a file that doesn't exist anymore would certainly
qualify as a persistent failure."

and

"Hmm ... a SELECT from one of the "actual tables" would then scan the
temp tables too, no?

Thinking about this, I seem to recall that we had agreed to make the
planner ignore temp tables of other backends when expanding an
inheritance list --- but I don't see anything in the code implementing
that, so it evidently didn't get done yet."

I don't immediately see TODO items correpsonding to these. Should there be some? Or do these qualify as bugs and should they be submitted to that queue?

--

Thomas F. O'Connell

Co-Founder, Information Architect

Sitening, LLC


Strategic Open Source: Open Your i™


http://www.sitening.com/

110 30th Avenue North, Suite 6

Nashville, TN 37203-6320

615-260-0005


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Patrick Welche
Date:
Subject: Re: escape string syntax and pg_dumpall
Next
From: Larry Rosenman
Date:
Subject: config.sub/config.guess.