On Sat, Apr 24, 2010 at 9:37 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: >> Unfortunately, I don't see much alternative to making smgr know >> something about the temp-ness of the relation, though I'm hoping to >> keep the smgr surgery to an absolute minimum. Maybe what we could do >> is incorporate the backend ID or PID into the file name when the >> relation is temp. Then we could scan for and nuke such files pretty >> easily. Otherwise I can't really think how to make it work. > > I think that could be a really good idea, mainly because it makes > post-crash cleanup MUCH safer: you can tell with certainty from the > filename that it's a leftover temp table. The notion of zapping files > just because we don't see them listed in pg_class has always scared the > heck out of me. > > We already know temp-ness at pretty low levels, like bufmgr vs localbuf. > Pushing it all the way down to smgr doesn't seem like a leap; in fact > I think it would eliminate a separate isTemp parameter in a lot of places.
Eh? I don't see how it's going to do that. ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
