Robert Haas <> writes:
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 12:27 PM, Tom Lane <> wrote:
>> I'm also a bit dubious of the assumption in RemoveOperatorById that an
>> operator can't be its own negator.  Yeah, that should not be the case,
>> but if it is the case the deletion will fail outright.

> So what?  We've never guaranteed that things are going to work if you
> start by corrupting the catalogs, and I wouldn't pick this as a place
> to start.

I would not be worried except that it breaks a case that used to work,
as your test below demonstrates.

>> We could resolve both of these issues by changing the semantics of
>> OprUpdate so that it unconditionally does a CommandCounterIncrement
>> after each update that it performs.  IMO that would be a lot simpler
>> and more bulletproof; it'd allow removal of a lot of these
>> overly-tightly-reasoned cases.

> I tried this, but it did not seem to work.

Odd.  If you post the revised patch, I'll try to chase down what's wrong.

                        regards, tom lane

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to