> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 4:13 AM, Leonardo Francalanci <m_lists@yahoo.it>
wrote:
> >> Maybe you should change xl_act_commit to have a separate list of rels to
> >> drop the init fork for (instead of mixing those with the list of files
to
> >> drop as a whole).
> >
> > I tried to follow your suggestion, thank you very much.
>
> I have to admit I don't like this approach very much. I can't see
> adding 4 bytes to every commit record for this feature.
I understand.
What if, in xl_xact_commit, instead of
RelFileNode xnodes
I use another struct for xnodes, something like:
{RelFileNode xnode;bool onlyInitFork;
}
That would increase the commit record size only when there are
RelFileNode(s) to drop at commit. So, instead of 4 bytes in
every commit, there are "wasted" bytes when the commit record
contains deleted permanent relations (that should happen much
less). I'm open to suggestions here...
> > 3) Should we have a "cascade" option? I don't know if I have to handle
> > inherited tables and other dependent objects
>
> Look at the way ALTER TABLE [ONLY] works for other action types, and copy it.
Ok
Thank you very much
Leonardo
