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> ?? 2025??8??19?? ???? 0:38 ?????? > It doesn't, which is (one reason) why it's just a crude hack. > A more appropriate solution would be to make plpgsql install > a shared-cache-invalidation callback that would watch for