Re: Re: Outstanding patches

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Alessio Bragadini <alessio(at)albourne(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Re: Outstanding patches
Date: 2001-05-09 15:53:45
Message-ID: 200105091553.f49FrjL05612@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-jdbc

> > Ok, this is a more general point: in Oracle (which, as Ian points out,
> > uses this feature extensively) if you recreate table foo, function fooey
> > is tagged as 'dirty' and recompiled on the spot next time is used. This
> > is also true for VIEWs and other objects, so you don't have the problem
> > we have when a view breaks because you've updated the underlining table.
>
> Indeed, and we have plans to do something similar sometime soon. My
> real objection to this proposed feature is that there is no way to
> handle the update as a local matter within the function, because
> changing the function's input datatypes actually means it's a different
> function. This creates all sorts of problems at both the definitional
> and implementation levels...

Does this relate to allowing functions to be recreated with the same OID
as the original function? I think we need that badly for 7.2.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2001-05-09 16:01:29 Re: Re: Outstanding patches
Previous Message Tom Lane 2001-05-09 15:45:08 Re: Case sensitive order by

Browse pgsql-jdbc by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Larry Mulcahy 2001-05-09 15:57:46 Re: Is DataSource implemented?
Previous Message Mark Rosa 2001-05-09 15:43:46 Re: JDBC Download.