Alvaro Herrera wrote: > I suppose the rationale is that this shouldn't happen because any > operation that does things this way must hold an exclusive lock on the > relation. But that doesn't guarantee that the relcache entry is > completely stable, does it? If we can get proof of that, then this > technique should be safe, I think.
It occurs to me that in order to test this we could run the recovery tests (including Michael's new 006 file, which you didn't include in your patch) under -D CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS. I think that'd be sufficient proof that it is solid. -- Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
