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

Re: why does plperl cache functions using just a bool for is_trigger

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Alex Hunsaker <badalex(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jan Urbański <wulczer(at)wulczer(dot)org>, Postgres - Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: why does plperl cache functions using just a bool for is_trigger
Date: 2010-11-01 16:02:20
Message-ID: (view raw or whole thread)
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 11/01/2010 11:28 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>   The fundamental issue here is that the contents of plperl_proc_desc
> structs are different between the trigger and non-trigger cases.
> Unless you're prepared to make them the same, and guarantee that they
> always will be the same in future, I think that including the istrigger
> flag in the hash key is a good safety feature.  It's also the same way
> that the other three PLs do things, and I see no good excuse for plperl
> to do things differently here.
> IOW, it's not broke, let's not fix it.

Ok, then let's make a note in the code to this effect. When the question 
was asked before about why it was there nobody seemed to have any good 



In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2010-11-01 16:25:08
Subject: Re: crash in plancache with subtransactions
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2010-11-01 15:56:02
Subject: Re: [PATCH] More Coccinelli cleanups

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2015 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group