| From: | Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Asko Oja <ascoja(at)gmail(dot)com>, Martin Pihlak <martin(dot)pihlak(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Patch: plan invalidation vs stored procedures |
| Date: | 2008-08-18 20:36:30 |
| Message-ID: | 1219091791.7341.6.camel@huvostro |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, 2008-08-18 at 11:05 +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> 2008/8/18 Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com>:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Le lundi 18 août 2008, Andrew Dunstan a écrit :
> >> > On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 09:40:19PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> >> This is not the kind of patch we put into stable branches.
> >>
> >> So what? That is not the only criterion for backpatching.
> >
> > I fail to understand why this problem is not qualified as a bug.
> >
>
> Does it change of result some queries?
Not in the long run, but not invalidating the functions (current
behaviour) postpones seeing the results of function change until DBA
manually restarts the error-producing client.
> It is protection to server's hang?
Can't understand this question :(
If you mean, does the change protect against hanging the server, then
no, currently the server does not actually hang, it just becomes
unusable until reconnect :(
---------
Hannu
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2008-08-18 20:38:29 | Re: Overhauling GUCS |
| Previous Message | Greg Smith | 2008-08-18 20:25:30 | Re: pgbench duration option |