so 1. 2. 2020 v 14:39 odesílatel 曾文旌(义从) <wenjing....@alibaba-inc.com>
napsal:
>
>
> 2020年1月30日 下午10:21，Pavel Stehule <pavel.steh...@gmail.com> 写道：
>
>
>
> čt 30. 1. 2020 v 15:17 odesílatel 曾文旌(义从) <wenjing....@alibaba-inc.com>
> napsal:
>
>>
>>
>> > 2020年1月29日 下午9:48，Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> 写道：
>> >
>> > On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 12:12 PM 曾文旌(义从) <wenjing....@alibaba-inc.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>> Opinion by Pavel
>> >>> + rel->rd_islocaltemp = true; <<<<<<< if this is valid, then the
>> name of field "rd_islocaltemp" is not probably best
>> >>> I renamed rd_islocaltemp
>> >>
>> >> I don't see any change?
>> >>
>> >> Rename rd_islocaltemp to rd_istemp in
>> global_temporary_table_v8-pg13.patch
>> >
>> > In view of commit 6919b7e3294702adc39effd16634b2715d04f012, I think
>> > that this has approximately a 0% chance of being acceptable. If you're
>> > setting a field in a way that is inconsistent with the current use of
>> > the field, you're probably doing it wrong, because the field has an
>> > existing purpose to which new code must conform. And if you're not
>> > doing that, then you don't need to rename it.
>> Thank you for pointing it out.
>> I've rolled back the rename.
>> But I still need rd_localtemp to be true, The reason is that
>> 1 GTT The GTT needs to support DML in read-only transactions ,like local
>> temp table.
>> 2 GTT does not need to hold the lock before modifying the index buffer
>> ,also like local temp table.
>>
>> Please give me feedback.
>>
>
> maybe some like
>
> rel->rd_globaltemp = true;
>
> and somewhere else
>
> if (rel->rd_localtemp || rel->rd_globaltemp)
> {
> ...
> }
>
> I tried to optimize code in global_temporary_table_v10-pg13.patch
>
>
> Please give me feedback.
>
I tested this patch and I have not any objections - from my user
perspective it is work as I expect
+#define RELATION_IS_TEMP(relation) \
+ ((relation)->rd_islocaltemp || \
+ (relation)->rd_rel->relpersistence == RELPERSISTENCE_GLOBAL_TEMP)
It looks little bit unbalanced
maybe is better to inject rd_isglobaltemp to relation structure
and then
it should to like
+#define RELATION_IS_TEMP(relation) \
+ ((relation)->rd_islocaltemp || \
+ (relation)->rd_isglobaltemp))
But I have not idea if it helps in complex
> Wenjing
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>> Wenjing
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >
>> > --
>> > Robert Haas
>> > EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
>> > The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
>>
>>
>
