Re: [HACKERS] Cached plans and statement generalization

From: Konstantin Knizhnik <k(dot)knizhnik(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
To: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Tsunakawa, Takayuki" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Cached plans and statement generalization
Date: 2018-01-12 12:53:11
Message-ID: 20638bbb-2744-a4ba-116d-084e9c6520bf@postgrespro.ru
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 12.01.2018 03:40, Thomas Munro wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 7, 2018 at 11:51 AM, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> wrote:
>> * Konstantin Knizhnik (k(dot)knizhnik(at)postgrespro(dot)ru) wrote:
>>> Updated version of the patch is attached.
>> This patch appears to apply with just a bit of fuzz and make check
>> passes, so I'm not sure why this is currently marked as 'Waiting for
>> author'.
>>
>> I've updated it to be 'Needs review'. If that's incorrect, feel free to
>> change it back with an explanation.
> Hi Konstantin,
>
> /home/travis/build/postgresql-cfbot/postgresql/src/backend/tcop/postgres.c:5249:
> undefined reference to `PortalGetHeapMemory'
>
> That's because commit 0f7c49e85518dd846ccd0a044d49a922b9132983 killed
> PortalGetHeapMemory. Looks like it needs to be replaced with
> portal->portalContext.
>
Hi  Thomas,

Thank you very much for reporting the problem.
Rebased version of the patch is attached.

--
Konstantin Knizhnik
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company

Attachment Content-Type Size
autoprepare-6.patch text/x-patch 71.8 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Christian Rossow 2018-01-12 12:57:20 Re: bytea bitwise logical operations implementation (xor / and / or / not)
Previous Message Robert Haas 2018-01-12 12:51:34 Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] BUG #14825: enum type: unsafe use?