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

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
To: Christophe Pettus <xof@thebuild.com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: David G. Johnston <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>
Cc: Matthias Kurz <m.kurz@irregular.at>
Cc: Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@bluetreble.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Alter or rename enum value
Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2016 08:57:35 -0400
Message-ID: <56F7D8BF.5000000@dunslane.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <B9E6AF60-A402-4388-BE5A-BD078F3A3155@thebuild.com>
References: <CAO=2mx6uvgPaPDf-rHqG8=1MZnGyVDMQeh8zS4euRyyg4D35OQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<56E049CC.8010201@dunslane.net>
	<25605.1457539654@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<56E05635.70908@dunslane.net>
	<28167.1457543612@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<CAO=2mx4rQHRvifT2yUQ1rz90A=9CVz4_Z0Sx1wTgwgQRzAimpQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAO=2mx6rK_h4BC7y+3Nu-8fuZJXdFjd9FE_MZnzkH+vnMp0C-Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<d8ja8ln7nl0.fsf@dalvik.ping.uio.no>
	<d8j60wb7na4.fsf@dalvik.ping.uio.no>
	<CAO=2mx6CgQXFJYXOpr4OJO+r8WX6PzEU5aT+K0vV94G7DxVJ0A@mail.gmail.com>
	<56F49CF8.8050007@BlueTreble.com>
	<27476.1458876456@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<CAO=2mx6EOh6uQQ57Kv2z0x=kuyVbkEbwiY8R2h6VCPL=Fxe5wg@mail.gmail.com>
	<56F58876.6020508@dunslane.net>
	<CAKFQuwZeVdo=qQy-WV_hfqy0Wsit9tuhtZOLsq1Jx82eKc8bfQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<56F6827F.9040104@dunslane.net>
	<3202.1459002341@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<56F69F5C.1060408@dunslane.net>
	<B9E6AF60-A402-4388-BE5A-BD078F3A3155@thebuild.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-hackers>



On 03/27/2016 12:43 AM, Christophe Pettus wrote:
> On Mar 26, 2016, at 7:40 AM, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> wrote:
>> It would be nice if we could find a less broad brush approach to dealing with the issue.
> I don't know how doable this is, but could we use the existing mechanism of marking an index invalid if it contains an enum type to which a value was added, and the transaction was rolled back?  For the 90% use case, that would be acceptable, I would expect.
>


The more I think about this the more I bump up against the fact that 
almost anything we do might want to do to ameliorate the situation is 
going to be rolled back. The only approach I can think of that doesn't 
suffer from this is to abort if an insert/update will affect an index on 
a modified enum. i.e. we prevent the possible corruption from happening 
in the first place, as we do now, but in a much more fine grained way.

cheers

andrew


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



view thread (56+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <56F7D8BF.5000000@dunslane.net>
Permalink:  ../56F7D8BF.5000000@dunslane.net/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/56F7D8BF.5000000@dunslane.net

 · 

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-hackers@postgresql.org
  Cc: andrew@dunslane.net, xof@thebuild.com, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, david.g.johnston@gmail.com, m.kurz@irregular.at, Jim.Nasby@bluetreble.com
  Subject: Re: Alter or rename enum value
  In-Reply-To: <56F7D8BF.5000000@dunslane.net>

* 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