Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Plan invalidation

From: "Pavan Deolasee" <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Pavan Deolasee" <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Plan invalidation
Date: 2007-04-03 18:27:56
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 4/3/07, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> I'm not particularly worried about missing a potential improvement
> in the plan during the first command after a change is committed.

Me too. Just noticed it, so brought it up.

If the invalidation were something that *had* to be accounted for,
> such as a dropped index, then there should be adequate locking for it;
> plancache is not introducing any new bug that wasn't there before.
Oh yes, I was wondering about the other parts of the code, not
plan invalidation. Never mind, it was just a thought.




In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2007-04-03 18:47:25
Subject: Re: Plan invalidation
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2007-04-03 18:15:52
Subject: Re: Plan invalidation

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2018 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group