| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Shared invalidation cache messages for temporary tables |
| Date: | 2011-03-14 12:42:09 |
| Message-ID: | 201103141242.p2ECg9J26347@momjian.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-03-11 at 20:44 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Looking at the code, it seems we create shared invalidation messages for
> > temporary table activity? Is this true? Should we be avoiding it?
> >
> > I tested this by reviewing the code and checking calls to
> > CacheInvalidateHeapTuple(), which happens for temporary table
> > creation/destruction.
>
> Yes, that gets called.
>
> But in PrepareForTupleInvalidation() we ignore everything apart from
> system relations, as the first check.
OK, so this is no problem? There is no optimization needed here?
Thanks.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2011-03-14 13:25:28 | Re: Macros for time magic values |
| Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2011-03-14 11:56:22 | Re: On-the-fly index tuple deletion vs. hot_standby |