Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> writes:
> Well, so you are saying that there really isn't any use-visible logic
> for those messages to be different,
No, and in fact the whole block of code is badly written because it
conflates two unrelated tests. I guess somebody was trying to save
a couple of nanoseconds by not calling GetCurrentSubTransactionId
if a previous test had failed, but really why should we care about
that number of cycles in COPY preliminaries? The code ought to be
more like this:
/* comment about skipping FSM or WAL here */
if (cstate->rel->rd_createSubid != InvalidSubTransactionId ||
cstate->rel->rd_newRelfilenodeSubid != InvalidSubTransactionId)
{
hi_options |= HEAP_INSERT_SKIP_FSM;
if (!XLogIsNeeded())
hi_options |= HEAP_INSERT_SKIP_WAL;
}
/* comment about when we can perform FREEZE here */
if (cstate->freeze)
{
if (!ThereAreNoPriorRegisteredSnapshots() || !ThereAreNoReadyPortals())
ereport(ERROR,
(ERRCODE_INVALID_TRANSACTION_STATE,
errmsg("cannot perform FREEZE because of prior transaction
activity")));
if (cstate->rel->rd_createSubid != GetCurrentSubTransactionId() &&
cstate->rel->rd_newRelfilenodeSubid != GetCurrentSubTransactionId())
ereport(ERROR,
(ERRCODE_OBJECT_NOT_IN_PREREQUISITE_STATE,
errmsg("cannot perform FREEZE because the table was not
created or truncated in the current subtransaction")));
hi_options |= HEAP_INSERT_FROZEN;
}
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
