On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 2:06 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: >> On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 12:27 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> Lastly, it bothers me that you've put in code to delete files belonging >>> to temp rels during crash restart, without any code to clean up their >>> catalog entries. This will therefore lead to dangling pg_class >>> references, with uncertain but probably not very nice consequences. > >> I thought about this pretty carefully, and I don't believe that there >> are any unpleasant consequences. The code that assigns relfilenode >> numbers is pretty careful to check that the newly assigned value is >> unused BOTH in pg_class and in the directory where the file will be >> created, so there should be no danger of a number getting used over >> again while the catalog entries remain. Also, the drop-object code >> doesn't mind that the physical storage doesn't exist; it's perfectly >> happy with that situation. > > Well, okay, but I'd suggest adding comments to the drop-table code > pointing out that it is now NECESSARY for it to not complain if the file > isn't there. This was never a design goal before, AFAIR --- the fact > that it works like that is kind of accidental. I am also pretty sure > that there used to be at least warning messages for that case, which we > would now not want.
That seems like a good idea. I'll post an updated patch. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
