Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: > 2. The patch seems to think that it can sometimes be safe to change > the relpersistence of an existing relation. Unless you can be sure > that no buffers can possibly be present in shared_buffers and nobody > will use an existing relcache entry to read a new one in, it's not, > because the buffers won't have the right BM_PERSISTENT marking. I'm > very nervous about the fact that this patch seems not to have touched > bufmgr.c, but maybe I'm missing something.
Maybe I misunderstood something, but I had the impression that this was handled by assigning a new relfilenode (and hence copying all the data). So the buffers with one marking would be disjoint from the ones with the other marking. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers