Re: Re: Probable bug with CreateFakeRelcacheEntry (now with reproducible test case) - Mailing list pgsql-bugs

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: Re: Probable bug with CreateFakeRelcacheEntry (now with reproducible test case)
Date
Msg-id CA+Tgmob7+KOgNoRVuW6XWQPb_p3Aa0zY+AHYHyzO3X8cuq4saQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Probable bug with CreateFakeRelcacheEntry (now with reproducible test case)  (Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>)
Responses Re: Re: Probable bug with CreateFakeRelcacheEntry (now with reproducible test case)  (Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>)
List pgsql-bugs
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 7:19 PM, Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com> wrote:
> This bug seems particularly troublesome because the right fix would be
> to include the relpersistence in the WAL records that need it. But that
> can't be backported (right?).

No, because if a WAL record was written at all, then by definition the
table is RELPERSISTENCE_PERMANENT.  So there's probably a localized
fix.

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

pgsql-bugs by date:

Previous
From: Dimitri Fontaine
Date:
Subject: Re: BUG #6704: ALTER EXTENSION postgis SET SCHEMA leaves dangling relations
Next
From: Dimitri Fontaine
Date:
Subject: Re: BUG #6704: ALTER EXTENSION postgis SET SCHEMA leaves dangling relations