Robert Haas wrote: > If there's any third-party code out there that is checking > rd_istemp, it likely also needs to be revised to check whether > WAL-logging is needed, not whether the relation is temp. The way > I've coded it, such code will fail to compile, and can be very > easily fixed by substituting a call to RelationNeedsWAL() or > RelationUsesLocalBuffers() or RelationUsesTempNamespace(), > depending on which property the caller actually cares about. Hmm... This broke the SSI patch, which was using rd_istemp to omit conflict checking where it was set to true. The property I care about is whether tuples in one backend can be read by an transaction in a different backend, which I assumed would not be true for temporary tables. Which of the above would be appropriate for that use? -Kevin
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
