Re: should ConstraintRelationId ins/upd cause relcache invals?
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
From: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>, Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>
Date: 2019-01-21T22:42:02Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Hi, On 2019-01-21 19:40:17 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > On 2019-Jan-21, Tom Lane wrote: > > > Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > > > > At https://postgr.es/m/201901182216.nr5clsxrn624@alvherre.pgsql I posted > > > a simplistic for the specific problem I found by calling > > > CacheInvalidateRelcache in the problem spot. But I'm wondering if the > > > correct fix isn't to have CacheInvalidateHeapTuple deal with FK > > > pg_constraint tuples instead, per the attached patch. > > > > +1, this is safer than expecting retail relcache inval calls to be > > added in all the right places. > > Thanks, pushed. Given https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20190121193300.gknn7p4pmmjg7nqf%40alap3.anarazel.de and the concerns voiced in the thread quoted therein, I'm a bit surprised that you just went ahead with this, and backpatched it to boot. Greetings, Andres Freund
Commits
-
Flush relcache entries when their FKs are meddled with
- a7474308ceaf 11.2 landed
- 4aead13a751f 9.6.12 landed
- 3037b28b89b4 10.7 landed
- 175544093524 12.0 landed
-
Restore foreign-key-aware estimation of join relation sizes.
- 100340e2dcd0 9.6.0 cited