On 2017-05-24 10:24:19 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 9:04 AM, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: > > At the very least we'll have to error out. That's still not nice usability > > wise, but it sure beats returning flat out wrong values. > > I'm not sure. That seems like it might often be worse. Now you need > manual intervention before anything even has a hope of working.
Well, but then we should just remove minval/maxval if we can't rely on it. > > I suspect that the proper fix would be to use a different relfilenode after > > ddl, when changing the seq file itself (I.e. setval and restart). That > > seems like it'd be architecturally more appropriate, but also some work. > > I can see some advantages to that, but it seems far too late to think > about doing that in v10. I wonder if that's not actually very little new code, and I think we might end up regretting having yet another inconsistent set of semantics in v10, which we'll then end up changing again in v11. - Andres -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
