Re: Rule recompilation

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>
Cc: Alex Pilosov <alex(at)pilosoft(dot)com>, PostgreSQL HACKERS <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Rule recompilation
Date: 2001-07-12 19:51:01
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.30.0107122147540.681-100000@peter.localdomain
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Jan Wieck writes:

> For most objects, there is no such "recompile" possible - at
> least not without storing alot more information than now.
> Create a function and based on that an operator. Then you
> drop the function and create another one. Hmmm, pg_operator
> doesn't have the function name and argument types, it only
> knows the old functions oid. How do you find the new function
> from here?

In these cases it'd be a lot simpler (and SQL-comforming) to implement the
DROP THING ... { RESTRICT | CASCADE } options. This would probably catch
most honest user errors more cleanly than trying to automatically
recompile things that perhaps aren't even meant to fit together any
longer.

--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net http://funkturm.homeip.net/~peter

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2001-07-12 19:53:55 Re: Re: [GENERAL] Vacuum and Transactions
Previous Message Tom Lane 2001-07-12 19:50:42 Re: Rule recompilation