Re: Patch: plan invalidation vs stored procedures
От | Hannu Krosing |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Patch: plan invalidation vs stored procedures |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1219180645.7109.52.camel@huvostro обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Patch: plan invalidation vs stored procedures (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 2008-08-19 at 16:56 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> writes: > > The actual criterion is not really "new user-visible feature" versus > > "bug fix". It's more an attempt at measuring how large a potential > > impact the change has. The patch I saw was introducing a whole new > > message type to go through the shared invalidation queue, which is not > > something to be taken lightly (consider that there are three message > > types of messages currently.) > > I hadn't read it yet, but that makes it wrong already. There's no need > for any new inval traffic --- the existing syscache inval messages on > pg_proc entries should serve fine. I have'nt looke at the patch either, but I suspect that what goes through shared mem is the registration for invalidation, as dependent function OIDs are only learned while compiling functions so when f_caller() learns that it caches plan f_called() then it registers through shared mem message its wish to invalidate this plan if f_called() is dropped or redefined. -------------- Hannu
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: