Re: WIP patch for plan invalidation

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-patches(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: WIP patch for plan invalidation
Date: 2007-03-11 02:34:34
Message-ID: 13324.1173580474@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches

Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
>> Comments?

> Why do CREATE/DROP/REINDEX DATABASE no longer call PreventTransactionChain?

I moved those calls into ProcessUtility to avoid having to pass an extra
argument to those functions. You could call this either way, but there
was already precedent for doing PreventTransactionChain in
ProcessUtility --- several existing commands did it that way. In the
patch as it stands, ProcessUtility does it for every command in which
the call is unconditional, and we only pass isTopLevel to command
subroutines that have some condition or other affecting what to do.
You could make about an equally good case for pushing all those
PreventTransactionChain calls out to the subroutines, but it didn't
really seem any prettier to do it that way.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Fuhr 2007-03-11 04:44:17 Fix race condition in size functions
Previous Message Gregory Stark 2007-03-11 02:32:51 Re: WIP patch for plan invalidation