On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 1:23 AM, Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 5:30 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> I left out the relkind check from the final commit because, for one
> thing, the check you added isn't actually right: toast relations can
> also have a visibility map. And also, I'm sort of wondering what the
> point of that check is. What does it protect us from? It doesn't
> seem very future-proof ... what if we add a new relkind in the future?
> Do we really want to have to update this?
>
> How about instead changing things so that we specifically reject
> indexes? And maybe some kind of a check that will reject anything
> that lacks a relfilnode? That seems like it would be more on point.
>
I agree, I don't have strong opinion about this.
It would be good to add condition for rejecting only indexes.
Attached patches are,
- Change heap2 rmgr description
- Add condition to pg_visibility
- Fix typo in pgvisibility.sgml
(Sorry for the late notice..)
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada