| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Vladimir Sitnikov <sitnikov(dot)vladimir(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Set search_path + server-prepared statements = cached plan must not change result type |
| Date: | 2016-01-25 17:49:19 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZ77PPtJbQ7BcXZHT2qnQcPxFExAC4Ba1qpxHApa=B4OQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 12:47 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> On 2016-01-25 12:39:29 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
>> What is the ideal behavior, in your view?
>
> FWIW, I think that for a lot of practical cases the previous behaviour,
> where a prepared statement was defined in the context of the search path
> set during the PREPARE, made a lot more sense. The current behaviour
> makes a few corner cases (dropped, or relations moved between schemas)
> simpler, while making real world things harder (different parts of an
> application using different search paths, drivers, increase in planning
> time).
That's a defensible position, but Vladimir didn't seem to like
*either* behavior.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2016-01-25 17:52:38 | Re: is there a deep unyielding reason to limit U&'' literals to ASCII? |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2016-01-25 17:47:29 | Re: Set search_path + server-prepared statements = cached plan must not change result type |