| From: | Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Etsuro Fujita <fujita(dot)etsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Cc: | Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi <rajkumar(dot)raghuwanshi(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: postgres_fdw : altering foreign table not invalidating prepare statement execution plan. |
| Date: | 2017-01-06 12:25:01 |
| Message-ID: | CAFjFpRdY5q1HG1N4eyrZxHYji4HS1X4TAGDEKUQXv9h3YomcrQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 2:49 PM, Etsuro Fujita
<fujita(dot)etsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
> On 2017/01/03 15:57, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
>>
>> The patch looks good to me, but I feel there are too many testscases.
>> Now that we have changed the approach to invalidate caches in all
>> cases, should we just include cases for SELECT or UPDATE or INSERT or
>> DELETE instead of each statement?
>
>
> I don't object to that, but (1) the tests I added wouldn't be that
> time-consuming, and (2) they would be more expected to help find bugs, in
> general, so I'd vote for keeping them. How about leaving that for the
> committer's judge?
>
Ok. Marking this as ready for committer.
--
Best Wishes,
Ashutosh Bapat
EnterpriseDB Corporation
The Postgres Database Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ashutosh Bapat | 2017-01-06 12:26:20 | Re: Potential data loss of 2PC files |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2017-01-06 11:43:14 | Re: Odd behavior with PG_TRY |