On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 12:03 PM, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: > On 2016-04-27 11:59:39 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: >> Masahiko Sawada posted a patch that fixes the problem for him, which >> does not involve any new WAL record type. It also seems to be fixing >> the problem in a way that is clean and consistent with what we've done >> elsewhere. > > It only fixes one symptom, the relcache entry is still wrong > afterwards. Which is pretty relevant for planning. > > >> The patch actually under discussion here manages to introduce a new >> WAL record type without fixing that problem. > > It does fix the problem, just not in a super robust way. Which is why I > think we should add something like Masahiko's fix additionally.
OK, that works for me. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
