Re: missing locking in at least INSERT INTO view WITH CHECK - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Dean Rasheed
Subject Re: missing locking in at least INSERT INTO view WITH CHECK
Date
Msg-id CAEZATCX4yCZZAagqQt_i4N7gMHQ6Qp9tnCbRZw3UwvZO0zqPog@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: missing locking in at least INSERT INTO view WITH CHECK  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 27 August 2015 at 19:29, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> On 2015-08-27 19:19:35 +0100, Dean Rasheed wrote:
>> It also seems to me that this warning has proved its worth
>
> Same here - I plan to re-submit it. Perhaps the number of bugs it found
> convinces Tom, after I address some of his points.
>
>> although I don't think it's something a production build should be
>> producing.  Perhaps it could be an Assert?
>
> It's currently protected by a #ifdef USE_ASSERT_CHECKING. A warning
> seems to make it easier to actually run the whole regression test, and
> it's consistent with what we do in a bunch of other places.
>

OK, that seems reasonable.

Regards,
Dean



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: missing locking in at least INSERT INTO view WITH CHECK
Next
From: Qingqing Zhou
Date:
Subject: Re: Our trial to TPC-DS but optimizer made unreasonable plan