Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] BUG #14825: enum type: unsafe use?
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
From: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew.dunstan@2ndquadrant.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, "David E. Wheeler" <david@justatheory.com>, Christophe Pettus <christophe.pettus@pgexperts.com>, Postgres-Bugs <pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org>, "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2018-01-12T22:06:12Z
Lists: pgsql-bugs, pgsql-hackers
On 2018-01-12 07:51:34 -0500, Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 11:01 PM, Thomas Munro > <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > > Are you saying we should do the work now to create a per-transaction > > DSM segment + DSA area + thing that every backend attaches to? > > No, I was just thinking you could stuff it into the per-parallel-query > DSM/DSA. But... > > > I didn't think creating backend local hash tables would be a problem > > because it's a vanishingly rare occurrence for the hash table to be > > created at all (ie when you've altered an enum), and if created, to > > have more than a couple of entries in it. > > ...this is also a fair point. OTOH, it seems quite likely that we'll add more transaction-lifetime shared data (e.g. combocid), so building per-xact infrastructure actually seems like a good idea. Greetings, Andres Freund
Commits
-
Revert to 9.6 treatment of ALTER TYPE enumtype ADD VALUE.
- 28e072707685 11.0 landed
- 93a1af0b3f63 10.0 landed
-
Remove heuristic same-transaction test from check_safe_enum_use().
- 01c5de88ff24 10.0 landed
- 984c92074d84 11.0 landed
-
Use a blacklist to distinguish original from add-on enum values.
- 175774d2932d 10.0 landed
- 1635e80d30b1 11.0 landed
-
Add support for coordinating record typmods among parallel workers.
- cc5f81366c36 11.0 cited