On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 10:57 PM Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz> wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 05:35:48PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > > What exactly do you argue has changed since the previous decision > > that should cause us to change it? In particular, where is the > > additional data to change our minds about the safety of such a thing? >
>From a technical perspective I really don't know how to solve it, but my intention here is to raise a hand and demonstrate there are real scenarios where Postgres breaks so easily. And unfortunately for the user perspective it sounds a bit fragile. Ok it's not a very common use case and the solution isn't easy, because if it is I'm sure it was already solved before. > Not sure that's safe, as we also want to avoid circular dependencies > similarly for pg_class, pg_index and pg_attribute. > Adding a TOAST can cause circular dependencies between those relations?? If you don't mind can you explain more about it? Regards, -- Fabrízio de Royes Mello Timbira - http://www.timbira.com.br/ PostgreSQL: Consultoria, Desenvolvimento, Suporte 24x7 e Treinamento
