| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | exclusion(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #18000: Access method used by matview can be dropped leaving broken matview |
| Date: | 2023-07-03 02:26:12 |
| Message-ID: | ZKIxxJYI5HFt/6mc@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 07:57:40AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> There was something that was itching me a little bit here: shouldn't
> we also switch the AM dependency of the second relation? In the
> context of a table rewrite, the new relation is temporary and quickly
> dropped after the relation files are swapped, but that may not be the
> case of all the callers of swap_relation_files() depending on the
> persistency of what they swap and what they want to do.
I have forgotten to update this thread. This has been fixed with
97d8910, where the pg_depend entries on AMof both relations, r1 and
r2, are updated during the swap.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Sandeep Thakkar | 2023-07-03 06:46:34 | Re: BUG #17968: installation |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2023-07-03 02:15:02 | Re: BUG #17994: Invalidating relcache corrupts tupDesc inside ExecEvalFieldStoreDeForm() |