Re: Documentation fixes for pg_visibility - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: Documentation fixes for pg_visibility
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoZvMR5yC1izmVM4V+Qqpo6AcHod0wer9=k4nsCu08Dvdw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Documentation fixes for pg_visibility  (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Documentation fixes for pg_visibility  (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 12:53 AM, Michael Paquier
<michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 1:46 PM, Michael Paquier
> <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 1:42 PM, Michael Paquier
>> <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> While looking at the module I found two mistakes in the docs:
>>> pg_visibility_map and pg_visibility *not* taking in input a block
>>> number are SRFs, and return a set of records. The documentation is
>>> just listing them with "returns record". A patch is attached.
>>
>> And that: s/PD_ALL_VISIBILE/PD_ALL_VISIBLE.
>
> And would it actually make sense to have pg_check_frozen(IN regclass,
> IN blkno) to target only a certain page? Same for pg_check_visible. It
> would take a long time to run those functions on large tables as they
> scan all the pages of a relation at once..

Under what circumstances would you wish to check only one page of a relation?

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: A couple of cosmetic changes around shared memory code
Next
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: Documentation fixes for pg_visibility