| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Martin Pihlak <martin(dot)pihlak(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, 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> |
| Subject: | Re: Patch: plan invalidation vs stored procedures |
| Date: | 2008-09-09 19:05:12 |
| Message-ID: | 22145.1220987112@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Martin Pihlak <martin(dot)pihlak(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> Yes, creating a new message type was a bit short sighted -- attached is a patch
> that uses syscache invalidation messages instead. This also adds additional
> tupleId field to SharedInvalCatcacheMsg. This is used to identify the
> invalidated tuple in PROC messages, for now others still pass InvalidOid.
Applied after rather heavy revision. Aside from the gripes I had
yesterday, I found out on closer inspection that the patch did things
all wrong for the case of a not-fully-planned cache item. I ended up
discarding the existing code for that and instead using the planner
machinery to extract dependencies of a parsed querytree.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Devrim GÜNDÜZ | 2008-09-09 19:20:00 | Keeping creation time of objects |
| Previous Message | Zeugswetter Andreas OSB sIT | 2008-09-09 18:59:58 | Re: Synchronous Log Shipping Replication |