Tom Lane wrote: > Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com> writes: >> The logical next step would be to get rid of the interXact concept >> altogether and always associate temporary files with the current >> resource owner; the caller should switch to a sufficiently long-lived >> one before calling. > > That would mean having a session-lifespan resource owner, which doesn't > seem amazingly useful to me: we have no other resource types for which > that would be even a little bit sane.
The only user of "interXact == true" is when the result set of a holdable cursor is materialized. I'm envisioning a new resource owner alongside PortalData.holdContext which is the memory context used to hold the tuplestore. > I'm inclined to leave the temp > file API as nearly as possible as-is. Having it attach only xact-local > files to the CurrentResourceOwner sounds fine to me. Ok, fine with me. > One thought here is that my inclination would be to keep > CleanupTemporaryFiles in place and have it just look for temp files that > didn't get closed, as a debugging aid. This is comparable to the > behavior of other modules that are mostly driven by resource managers. > We didn't take out the end-of-xact checks when we added resource manager > support elsewhere, and I'm not inclined to do that here. I agree we > don't need an EOSubXact-time crosscheck, though. Ok, committed that way. I made the cross-check a WARNING. That seems like the right level of seriousness, although I see that many of the other similar checks are Asserts. -- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
