On 10/21/16 7:43 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
Jim Nasby wrote:
It occurs to me that it might be worth embedding the relation name in the
free space of the first block. Most people would never notice the missing 64
bytes, but it would be incredibly helpful in cases like this...
Agreed. The problem is how to install it without breaking pg_upgrade.
It can't look up relation names?
Well, that's the first problem. The second problem is how to cope with
RENAME TABLE.
If the name was only encoded in the first block of the relation I'm not
sure how bad this would be; are there any facilities to change the name
back on a rollback?
--
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX
Experts in Analytics, Data Architecture and PostgreSQL
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com
855-TREBLE2 (855-873-2532) mobile: 512-569-9461
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
