From: | Gavin Sherry <swm(at)linuxworld(dot)com(dot)au> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Prepared queries and ANALYZE |
Date: | 2003-04-28 05:37:17 |
Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.21.0304281532240.21086-100000@linuxworld.com.au |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, 28 Apr 2003, Tom Lane wrote:
> Gavin Sherry <swm(at)linuxworld(dot)com(dot)au> writes:
> > Looking through the query preparing and stats analyze code, I noticed that
> > prepared queries using an analyzed table are not replanned. I imagine that
> > some users of prepared queries would not want the above behaviour, plan
> > stability etc, but surely others would.
> > I didn't notice any discusion of this in the list archives. Any technical
> > reasons why this shouldn't happen?
>
> Well, there are implementation reasons why it doesn't happen: there's no
> infrastructure for determining which tables a prepared query depends on
> nor for re-planning it if we did notice they'd changed.
Yes. Speaking to Bruce on IRC I was reminded that prepared queries exist
on a single backend which makes such this problem less pertinent than a
general solution, which you mentioned.
Gavin
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD | 2003-04-28 07:51:05 | Re: STABLE functions |
Previous Message | Sumaira Ali - | 2003-04-28 05:25:44 | LockData (Lock.h) |