Horton

Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] BUG #14825: enum type: unsafe use?

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
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: 2018-01-13T02:42:49Z
Lists: pgsql-bugs, pgsql-hackers 
On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 5:06 PM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> 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.

Sure, but there's no urgency about it.  Particularly if the first cut
at this is implemented using dshash, moving the dshash to a different
DSA with a different lifespan later should be easy.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Commits

  1. Revert to 9.6 treatment of ALTER TYPE enumtype ADD VALUE.

  2. Remove heuristic same-transaction test from check_safe_enum_use().

  3. Use a blacklist to distinguish original from add-on enum values.

  4. Add support for coordinating record typmods among parallel workers.