| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Joshua Drake <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>, Asko Oja <ascoja(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Martin Pihlak <martin(dot)pihlak(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Patch: plan invalidation vs stored procedures |
| Date: | 2008-08-19 20:56:04 |
| Message-ID: | 10333.1219179364@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> The actual criterion is not really "new user-visible feature" versus
> "bug fix". It's more an attempt at measuring how large a potential
> impact the change has. The patch I saw was introducing a whole new
> message type to go through the shared invalidation queue, which is not
> something to be taken lightly (consider that there are three message
> types of messages currently.)
I hadn't read it yet, but that makes it wrong already. There's no need
for any new inval traffic --- the existing syscache inval messages on
pg_proc entries should serve fine.
More generally, if we are to try to invalidate on the strength of
pg_proc changes, what of other DDL changes? Operators, operator
classes, maybe? How about renaming a schema? I would like to see a
line drawn between things we find worth trying to track and things we
don't. If there is no such line, we're going to need a patch a lot
larger than this one.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2008-08-19 21:03:48 | Re: A smaller default postgresql.conf |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2008-08-19 20:38:36 | Re: Patch: plan invalidation vs stored procedures |