That's correct??this is a simple and blunt patch, and it fails to account for 
many factors. Initially, I wasn't even sure if this qualified as a distinct 
issue. Your solution is far more reasonable, and I will rethink the new 
implementation thoroughly based on your approach.


Thanks,
Zeng Man


                    Tom Lane<t...@sss.pgh.pa.us&gt;&nbsp;?? 2025??8??19?? ???? 
0:38 ??????

&gt;&nbsp;It doesn't, which is (one reason) why it's just a crude hack.

&gt;&nbsp;A more appropriate solution would be to make plpgsql install

&gt; a shared-cache-invalidation callback that would watch for

Reply via email to