Re: DropRelFileNodeBuffers API change (was Re: [BUGS] BUG #5599: Vacuum fails due to index corruption issues)

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Heikki Linnakangas
Тема Re: DropRelFileNodeBuffers API change (was Re: [BUGS] BUG #5599: Vacuum fails due to index corruption issues)
Дата
Msg-id 4C6852A2.70503@enterprisedb.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на DropRelFileNodeBuffers API change (was Re: [BUGS] BUG #5599: Vacuum fails due to index corruption issues)  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Ответы Re: DropRelFileNodeBuffers API change (was Re: [BUGS] BUG #5599: Vacuum fails due to index corruption issues)  (Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On 15/08/10 21:58, Tom Lane wrote:
> Does anyone have an opinion whether it's likely that any third-party
> code is calling DropRelFileNodeBuffers directly?

I doubt it. External modules shouldn't be modifying relations at such a 
low level.

--   Heikki Linnakangas  EnterpriseDB   http://www.enterprisedb.com


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: assertions and constraint triggers
Следующее
От: Robert Haas
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: LockDatabaseObject vs. LockSharedObject