From: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: removal of dangling temp tables
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2018 12:42:03 +0900
Message-ID: <20181215034203.GF5012@paquier.xyz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181215020632.5vlffyvfpn4k42cn@alvherre.pgsql>
References: <CA+TgmoYuAupG1+aovKuauNZX27GGCda5BSfT=tXtFrkd+8HmaQ@mail.gmail.com>
<20181215020632.5vlffyvfpn4k42cn@alvherre.pgsql>
On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 11:06:32PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> I did propose in my OP the idea of a PGPROC boolean flag that indicates
> whether the temp namespace has been set up. If not, have autovac remove
> those tables. I like this option better, but I fear it adds more
> ProcArrayLock contention. Maybe I can just use a new LWLock to
> coordinate that particular member of the ProcGlobal array ... (but then
> it can no longer be a boolean.)
Isn't that what tempNamespaceId can be used for in PGPROC now? The flag
would be set only when a backend creates a new temporary schema so as it
can be tracked as the owner of the schema.
--
Michael
Attachments:
signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 832B) download
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-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: michael@paquier.xyz, alvherre@2ndquadrant.com, robertmhaas@gmail.com, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: removal of dangling temp tables
In-Reply-To: <20181215034203.GF5012@paquier.xyz>
* 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