Horton

Re: Patch: plan invalidation vs stored procedures

Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Martin Pihlak <martin.pihlak@gmail.com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>, Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine@hi-media.com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, Joshua Drake <jd@commandprompt.com>, Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com>, Hannu Krosing <hannu@2ndQuadrant.com>, Asko Oja <ascoja@gmail.com>, Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>, David Fetter <david@fetter.org>
Date: 2008-09-09T19:05:12Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
Martin Pihlak <martin.pihlak@gmail.com> writes:
> Yes, creating a new message type was a bit short sighted -- attached is a patch
> that uses syscache invalidation messages instead. This also adds additional
> tupleId field to SharedInvalCatcacheMsg. This is used to identify the
> invalidated tuple in PROC messages, for now others still pass InvalidOid.

Applied after rather heavy revision.  Aside from the gripes I had
yesterday, I found out on closer inspection that the patch did things
all wrong for the case of a not-fully-planned cache item.  I ended up
discarding the existing code for that and instead using the planner
machinery to extract dependencies of a parsed querytree.

			regards, tom lane