Re: [Slony1-general] Re: dangling lock information?

From: Andreas Pflug <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
Cc: Chris Browne <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [Slony1-general] Re: dangling lock information?
Date: 2005-08-30 21:36:13
Message-ID: 4314D14D.2070205@pse-consulting.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Alvaro Herrera wrote:

>
>>Unfortunately, it's not at all obvious how to accomplish that :-(.
>
>
> I don't think it can be easily done with the current code. This is
> plpgsql code, right? There are some ways to cause recompilation for
> those, at least on the 8.1 code I'm looking at.

Well at least when a procedure is dropped, its cached plans could be
dropped as well (apparently the cache plan is located trough some kind
of hash, not the pg_proc.oid?). I do understand that the usual case, a
table oid changed while cached inside a procedure isn't easily
detectable because it would require dependency information generated
from procedure's source.

Regards,
Andreas

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Chris Browne 2005-08-30 22:08:47 Re: [Slony1-general] Re: dangling lock information?
Previous Message Tom Lane 2005-08-30 20:36:16 Re: Intermittent stats test failures on buildfarm