Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> But I did notice that we're not fsyncing the newly written relation like 
> we should.

Good point, but doesn't the analogy to copy_relation_data say that we
should sync if not rd_istemp?  (This is my fault BTW; your original
patch kept the data in shared buffers, so it wasn't subject to the

> BTW: In tablecmds.c the new relation is fsynced with smgrimmedsync, not 
> heap_sync.

That's okay since that routine is just copying the one table.  TOAST is
handled via recursion of ATExecSetTableSpace.

                        regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

Reply via email to