Re: [HACKERS] Isn't init_irels() dangerous ?

[Hiroshi Inoue]

Tom Lane wrote: > > Hiroshi Inoue <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Tom Lane wrote: > >> "Hiroshi Inoue" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >>>> It seems that init_irels() should be called after > >>>> InitializeTransactionSystem() was called. > >> > >> Can we just swap the order of the RelationCacheInitialize() and > >> InitializeTransactionSystem() calls in InitPostgres? If that > >> works, I'd have no objection. > > > It doesn't work. InitializeTransactionSystem() requires > > pg_log/pg_variable relations which are already built in > > RelationCacheInitialize(). > > OK. Second proposal: do the init_irels() call in > RelationCacheInitializePhase2(). I've just looked through the > other stuff that's done in between, and I don't think any of it > needs valid relcache entries. > Oops, I neglected to reply "agreed", sorry. It would be much safer for init_irels() to be called in a proper transaction than the current implementation. Regards. Hiroshi Inoue