From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: 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 14:20:36 -0700
Message-ID: <20230726212036.GE3310393@nathanxps13> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1948637.1690406048@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <87sf9apnr0.fsf@wibble.ilmari.org>
<20230726205031.GD3310393@nathanxps13>
<1948637.1690406048@sss.pgh.pa.us>
On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 05:14:08PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> I think we should reword this to just generically claim that holding
> the Relation reference open for the whole transaction reduces overhead.
WFM
--
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, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, ilmari@ilmari.org
Subject: Re: Obsolete reference to pg_relation in comment
In-Reply-To: <20230726212036.GE3310393@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