On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 4:31 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: >> On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 1:41 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> BTW, I notice that the MVCC-catalog-scans patch summarily asserts that >>> RenumberEnumType no longer poses any concurrency hazards. I doubt that's >>> true: isn't it still possible that pg_enum rows acquired through the >>> syscaches will have inconsistent enumsortorder values, if they were >>> read at different times? If you want to examine enumsortorder, you really >>> need to be comparing rows you know were read with the *same* snapshot. > >> Good point, I missed that. Here's a proposed comment patch. > > Looks sane to me.
Thanks for the review. Committed. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
