"Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote > > You'd need two essentially equivalent versions of SearchSysCache, and > you'd lose the ability to make the error message identify what was being > searched for, so I vote no. >
Both arguments are not necessarily true. This change is quite like what we made to hash_search(). There is only one SearchSysCache() which will take an extra argument "isComplain" (vs. HASH_ENTER_NULL). The error message can be easily identified from the first parameter "cacheId" -- we will add another field in struct cachedesc which describs the cache name. Regards, Qingqing ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
