Hi, On 2024-06-18 19:58:26 +0530, Ashutosh Sharma wrote: > On Tue, Jun 18, 2024 at 7:50 PM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > > > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: > > > On Tue, Jun 18, 2024 at 8:10 AM Ashutosh Sharma <ashu.coe...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > >> Executing below commands: > > >> -- set allow_system_table_mods TO on; > > >> -- truncate table pg_type; > > > > > If the operation isn't allowed without turning on > > > allow_system_table_mods, that means that doing it is probably a bad > > > idea and will probably break stuff, as happened here. > > > > Nothing good can come of truncating *any* core system catalog --- what > > do you think you'll still be able to do afterwards? > > > > I think the assertion you noticed is there because the code path gets > > traversed during REINDEX, which is an operation we do support on > > system catalogs. I have zero interest in making truncate work > > on them. > > > > I agree with you on that point. How about considering a complete > restriction instead?
What's the point? There are occasional cases where doing something dangerous is useful, for debugging or corruption recovery. If we flat out prohibit this we'll just need a allow_system_table_mods_but_for_real option. Greetings, Andres Freund
