Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: pgsql: Add C comment about why we send cache invalidation messages for

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-committers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pgsql: Add C comment about why we send cache invalidation messages for
Date: 2011-09-06 20:39:09
Message-ID: 201109062039.p86Kd9904721@momjian.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-committers
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> > Add C comment about why we send cache invalidation messages for
> > session-local objects.
> 
> This comment seems inaccurate and bizarrely placed.  What question
> were you trying to answer?

It was in response to my email where I asked why we are sending cache
invalidation messages for temporary tables that can't be seen by any
other backends:

	http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2011-03/msg00844.php

i.e. why are we generating unnecessary invalidation traffic.  Is there a
better place for the comment?

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

  + It's impossible for everything to be true. +

In response to

Responses

pgsql-committers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2011-09-06 21:07:13
Subject: pgsql: Improve comment about handling of temp tables in shared-invalco
Previous:From: Peter EisentrautDate: 2011-09-06 20:07:00
Subject: pgsql: Correct ancient logic mistake in assertion

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group