Tom Lane wrote: > Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > I'm not sure I follow. Are you suggesting adding a new function, > > similar to pg_class_ownercheck, which additionally checks for temp-ness? > > No, I was just suggesting adding the check for temp-ness in cluster() > and cluster_rel() where we do pg_class_ownercheck. We already have the > rel open there and so it's cheap to do the temp-ness check. I applied a patch along these lines to HEAD and 8.2. I am unsure if I should backpatch to 8.1: the code in cluster.c has changed, and while it is relatively easy to modify the patch, this is a rare bug and nobody has reported it in CLUSTER (not many people clusters temp tables, it seems). Should I patch only REINDEX? How far back? -- Alvaro Herrera http://www.amazon.com/gp/registry/5ZYLFMCVHXC "The eagle never lost so much time, as when he submitted to learn of the crow." (William Blake) ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
