RE: [HACKERS] Bug report for 7.0beta1 in 'CREATE FUNCTION...'

From: "Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: "The Hermit Hacker" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>
Cc: <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: RE: [HACKERS] Bug report for 7.0beta1 in 'CREATE FUNCTION...'
Date: 2000-03-01 05:56:43
Message-ID: 000701bf8342$ebc500e0$2801007e@tpf.co.jp
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
> [mailto:owner-pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org]On Behalf Of Hiroshi Inoue
> Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2000 11:06 AM
> To: The Hermit Hacker
> Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
> Subject: RE: [HACKERS] Bug report for 7.0beta1 in 'CREATE FUNCTION...'
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
> > [mailto:owner-pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org]On Behalf Of The Hermit
> > Hacker
> >
> >
> > Can someone look into this, and followup with Don? :)
> >
>
> Currently utility commands aren't executable in PL/pgSQL.
> In short,it's due the lack of implementation of copyObject()
> for UtilityStatements.
> However,there's another essential problem.
>
> PL/pgSQL caches prepared plans for fucntions at their
> first execution time. Though many oids/numbers ... exist
> in the cached plans,they are changed by DML statements
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Oops sorry,DDL not DML statement.

> and cached plans would become invalid. Currently once
> a plan is cached,it stays in TopMemoryContext forever
> and would never be removed/changed.
>

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Thomas Lockhart 2000-03-01 06:14:51 Re: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] prob with aggregate and group by - returns multiplesh
Previous Message Tom Lane 2000-03-01 05:42:14 Re: [HACKERS] minor bug in 7.0: casting