On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 12:33 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: >> On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 12:14 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> The above scenario is only a risk if you suppose that dropping a >>> relation that lacks physical storage will nonetheless result in >>> attempted unlink()s. I think that that's probably not the case; > >> Why? How would we know that it didn't have physical storage prior to >> attempting the unlinks? > > From the relkind.
Oh, sure, I agree with you in that specific case. -- 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
