From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
To: Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker <ilmari@ilmari.org>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Obsolete reference to pg_relation in comment
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2023 13:50:31 -0700
Message-ID: <20230726205031.GD3310393@nathanxps13> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87sf9apnr0.fsf@wibble.ilmari.org>
References: <87sf9apnr0.fsf@wibble.ilmari.org>
Okay, now looking at the patch...
On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 06:48:51PM +0100, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker wrote:
> * All accesses to pg_largeobject and its index make use of a single Relation
> - * reference, so that we only need to open pg_relation once per transaction.
> + * reference, so that we only need to open pg_class once per transaction.
> * To avoid problems when the first such reference occurs inside a
> * subtransaction, we execute a slightly klugy maneuver to assign ownership of
> * the Relation reference to TopTransactionResourceOwner.
Hm. Are you sure this is actually referring to pg_class? It seems
unlikely given pg_relation was renamed 14 years before this comment was
added, and the code appears to be ensuring that pg_largeobject and its
index are opened at most once per transaction. I couldn't find the
original thread for this comment, unfortunately, but ISTM we might want to
replace "pg_relation" with "them" instead.
--
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
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: nathandbossart@gmail.com, ilmari@ilmari.org
Subject: Re: Obsolete reference to pg_relation in comment
In-Reply-To: <20230726205031.GD3310393@nathanxps13>
* 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