Re: Is temporary functions feature official/supported? Found some issues with it.
Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
From: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
To: Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Alexey Bashtanov <bashtanov@imap.cc>, pgsql-bugs <pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org>, Mi Tar <mmitar@gmail.com>
Date: 2019-01-16T01:36:33Z
Lists: pgsql-bugs
Attachments
- 0001-Restrict-more-the-use-of-temporary-namespace-in-two-.patch (text/x-diff) patch 0001
- 0002-Simplify-2PC-restriction-handling-for-temporary-obje.patch (text/x-diff) patch 0002
On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 03:36:56PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > Thank you for updating the patch. The patch looks good to me. And the > new regression test for CREATE EXTENSION seems to work fine but maybe > it's better to reset client_min_messages at cleanup for safety. Sure, done. I have been working on this patch more this morning, and here is a proposal for commit. So please let me know if there are any objections with that. 9b013dc is the commit which has introduced MyXactFlags, so this means that we cannot get that back-patched further down than v10. Per the lack of complains, that's a restriction I can live with. The first patch is the actual fix to back-patch. The second patch is an improvement I propose only for HEAD which removes ACCESSEDTEMPREL, replacing it with ACCESSEDTEMPNAMESPACE. For now I propose to commit 0001, then I'll spawn a new thread to discuss 0002 on -hackers as XACT_FLAGS_ACCESSEDTEMPREL has the advantage to allow skipping ON COMMIT DELETE if no temporary tables have been accessed. Perhaps that's not worth bothering, but that point seems worth poking at, at least to me. -- Michael
Commits
-
Restrict the use of temporary namespace in two-phase transactions
- b15160bc716e 10.7 landed
- 3e4fdb3bc0dc 11.2 landed
- c5660e0aa52d 12.0 landed