Tom Lane wrote: >> Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes: >>> Hm, strategically sprinkled CheckTableNotInUse() might do the trick? > > Attached is a proposed patch that closes off this problem. I've tested > it to the extent that it blocks Albe's example and passes check-world.
I tested it, and it works fine. Thanks! > I'm unsure whether to back-patch or not; the main argument for not doing > so is that if any extensions are calling DefineIndex() directly, this > would be an API break for them. Given what a weird case this is, I'm not > sure it's worth that. > > A possible end-run around the API objection would be to not add an extra > argument to DefineIndex() in the back branches, but to use !is_alter_table > as the control condition. That would work for the core callers, although > we might need a special case for bootstrap mode. On the other hand, > thinking again about hypothetical third-party callers, it's possible that > that's not the right answer for them, in which case they'd be really in > trouble. So I'm not that much in love with that answer. It causes a slight bellyache to leave an unfixed data corruption bug in the back branches (if only index corruption), but I agree that it is such a weird case to create an index in a BEFORE trigger that we probably can live without a back-patch. Yours, Laurenz Albe -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
