Re: Calling PrepareTempTablespaces in BufFileCreateTemp - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Geoghegan
Subject Re: Calling PrepareTempTablespaces in BufFileCreateTemp
Date
Msg-id CAH2-WznA=s0j0Cv4WOnECM7uWqgtWHoXTMZZ0CMF7A54GuWwBA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Calling PrepareTempTablespaces in BufFileCreateTemp  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Calling PrepareTempTablespaces in BufFileCreateTemp
Re: Calling PrepareTempTablespaces in BufFileCreateTemp
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 12:17 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> After a bit more thought it seemed like another answer would be to
> make all three of those functions assert that the caller did the
> right thing, as per attached.  This addresses the layering-violation
> complaint, but might be more of a pain in the rear for developers.

In what sense is it not already a layering violation to call
PrepareTempTablespaces() as often as we do? PrepareTempTablespaces()
parses and validates the GUC variable and passes it to fd.c, but to me
that seems almost the same as calling the fd.c function
SetTempTablespaces() directly. PrepareTempTablespaces() allocates
memory that it won't free itself within TopTransactionContext. I'm not
seeing why the context that the PrepareTempTablespaces() catalog
access occurs in actually matters.

Like you, I find it hard to prefer one of the approaches over the
other, though I don't really know how to assess this layering
business. I'm glad that either approach will prevent oversights,
though.
-- 
Peter Geoghegan



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: Why is it OK for dbsize.c to look at relation files directly?
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Calling PrepareTempTablespaces in BufFileCreateTemp