Re: BUG #18000: Access method used by matview can be dropped leaving broken matview

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Michael Paquier
Тема Re: BUG #18000: Access method used by matview can be dropped leaving broken matview
Дата
Msg-id ZJtst5BUaRnH6JSj@paquier.xyz
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: BUG #18000: Access method used by matview can be dropped leaving broken matview  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
Ответы Re: BUG #18000: Access method used by matview can be dropped leaving broken matview  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
Список pgsql-bugs
Дерево обсуждения 
On Tue, Jun 27, 2023 at 11:23:32AM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> Should we check changeDependencyFor()'s return value? On a first glance it
> looks like it would be an error to return 0 in this case?

Agreed.  I was wondering if this was worth having in this path (other
code paths are rather lax about that), but yes let's do it as there
should not be more than one record in pg_depend.
--
Michael
Вложения

В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: BUG #18003: FATAL: cannot request additional shared memory outside shmem_request_hook
Следующее
От: Michael Paquier
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: BUG #18000: Access method used by matview can be dropped leaving broken matview