Re: 'DROP INDEX' kills stored rpocedures

From: Vlad Krupin <vlad(at)echospace(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "scott(dot)marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: 'DROP INDEX' kills stored rpocedures
Date: 2003-04-03 19:11:50
Message-ID: 3E8C8776.6050801@echospace.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Tom Lane wrote:

>"scott.marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com> writes:
>
>
>>Don't make assumptions like that. In postgresql, DDL is transactionable.
>>
>>
>
>I think his actual problem is that plpgsql cached a query plan for some
>command while the index was in place, and then on a later re-execution
>of the function, it tried to re-use the cached plan. This is a general
>problem that we know we need to fix sooner or later --- cached plans
>need to be invalidated when there are DDL changes to the underlying
>tables, views, etc.
>
that totally makes sense (in fact, I sent another message to the list 15
minutes ago guessing that this could be the case. You can ignore it now).

So, if I first re-create indexes and then do a 'VACUUM ANALYZE' on the
table where those indexes were dropped, it should discard the old cached
plans and create a new one, right?

Vlad

--
Vlad Krupin
Software Engineer
echospace.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Clarence Gardner 2003-04-03 19:16:32 triggers using row values
Previous Message Tom Lane 2003-04-03 19:11:13 Re: RelationBuildDesc Notice (corrupt DB?)