pg.ddx.io  pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org mailing list archive  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew.dunstan@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: balazs@obiserver.hu
Cc: pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: BUG #14825: enum type: unsafe use?
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2017 10:42:59 -0400
Message-ID: <27064.1506350579@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b2890b9d-2383-955f-786c-8e252dce04cb@2ndQuadrant.com>
References: <20170922185904.1448.16585@wrigleys.postgresql.org>
	<15165.1506116768@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<3cece400-af56-7145-2e65-f044de1b0b68@2ndQuadrant.com>
	<28968.1506136792@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<f29e2d7e-7d71-b3b7-2fed-d52bddd8ca61@2ndQuadrant.com>
	<24380.1506179805@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<16272.1506189656@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<928f5974-151f-0273-0221-fac213e7624f@2ndQuadrant.com>
	<19137.1506196325@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<4942e2c0-3302-f496-d4c1-a967f77d0143@2ndQuadrant.com>
	<25662.1506204381@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<9479302a-09b8-4264-f9c4-514b65f18547@2ndQuadrant.com>
	<18127.1506285450@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<2770f70a-5977-3fa1-1065-11b4cc69f07f@2ndQuadrant.com>
	<23438.1506294409@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<a9a175c3-164b-6997-8b97-c04d1c2df753@2ndQuadrant.com>
	<25809.1506348877@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<b2890b9d-2383-955f-786c-8e252dce04cb@2ndQuadrant.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-bugs>

Andrew Dunstan <andrew.dunstan@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> On 09/25/2017 10:14 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Oh ... I did not think we were on the same page, because your patch
>> didn't include removal of the same-transaction heuristic.  It'd be
>> sensible to do that as a separate patch, though, to make it easier
>> to put back if we decide we do want it.

> I understood you to say that the blacklist patch was all we needed to do
> for v10. That's my position, i.e. I think we can live with the heuristic
> test for now if the blacklist patch is applied. Maybe we need to
> document that the heuristic test can generate some false negatives when
> testing for a type that is created in the current transaction.

No, as I said upthread, I want the heuristic out of there.  I think the
blacklist idea covers enough use-cases that we possibly don't need the
same-transaction test at all.  Furthermore I'm doubtful that the heuristic
form of the same-transaction test is adequate to satisfy the use-cases
that the blacklist test doesn't cover.  So I think we should remove that
test and see whether we get any complaints, and if so what the details of
the real-world use-cases look like.

			regards, tom lane


-- 
Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs



view thread (48+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <27064.1506350579@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Permalink:  ../27064.1506350579@sss.pgh.pa.us/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/27064.1506350579@sss.pgh.pa.us

 · 

reply
Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org
  Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, andrew.dunstan@2ndquadrant.com, balazs@obiserver.hu, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
  Subject: Re: BUG #14825: enum type: unsafe use?
  In-Reply-To: <27064.1506350579@sss.pgh.pa.us>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox