Excerpts from Stephen Frost's message of vie ene 07 15:29:52 -0300 2011:
> * Stephen Frost (sfr...@snowman.net) wrote:
> > * Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
> > > > Making it part of DISCARD PLANS; and back-patching it to 8.3 where
> > > > DISCARD was introduced would be awesome for me.
On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 4:28 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> Thoughts?
Unfortunately, we've officially exceeded my level of knowledge to the
point where I can't comment intelligently. Sorry :-(
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
--
Sent v
All,
Alright, so, the whole fn_extra stuff seems to be unrelated.. I'm not
sure when it's used (perhaps multiple calls to the same function in a
given query?), but the PLs have their own hash tables that they use for
storing functions that have been called. I had assumed that was done
through fm
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 1:29 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > #1. Add a new 'Top-but-removed-on-DISCARD' context and modify the PLs to
> > use that instead of TopMemoryContext and require any other contexts
> > they create to be children of it.
>
On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 1:29 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> #1. Add a new 'Top-but-removed-on-DISCARD' context and modify the PLs to
> use that instead of TopMemoryContext and require any other contexts
> they create to be children of it.
I'm guessing that just resetting the memory context i
* Stephen Frost (sfr...@snowman.net) wrote:
> * Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
> > > Making it part of DISCARD PLANS; and back-patching it to 8.3 where
> > > DISCARD was introduced would be awesome for me. :)
> >
> > I'd need to look at this more closely before committing anything, but
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
> Really it seems to me that changing the search path ought to discard
> anything that might have been done differently had the search path
> been different, but I don't think that's back-patch material.
I like that idea, but I agree it wouldn't be back
On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 8:43 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> To be honest, I agree it's a bug, and I would *love* to have it
> back-patched, but I could see an argument for it to be something
> explicit from DISCARD PLANS; and would hence require a grammar
> change which isn't something we'd typically b
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
> If DISCARD ALL doesn't flush this stuff, I'd consider that an outright
> bug. Does it?
No, it does not, based on my testing against 8.4.5:
Simple function:
CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION test_func() RETURNS boolean
AS $_$
D
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 5:22 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> If it's "performance" vs. "correctness", you can guess what I'm going to
> vote for, however, in this case, I can't see how either of the other
> options would perform better than a discard-like approach. If people
> are already using 'discar
* Merlin Moncure (mmonc...@gmail.com) wrote:
> this has been discussed a couple of times -- a plausible alternative
> might be to adjust the plan caching mechanism to organize the plan
> cache around search_path. that way you get a separate plan per
> search_path instance.
That would certainly be
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 4:30 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Merlin Moncure (mmonc...@gmail.com) wrote:
>> this is a problem. under what circumstances would you want to discard
>> them and why? the main problem I see with cached plpgsql plans is
>> interactions with search_path -- but DISCARD might n
* Merlin Moncure (mmonc...@gmail.com) wrote:
> this is a problem. under what circumstances would you want to discard
> them and why? the main problem I see with cached plpgsql plans is
> interactions with search_path -- but DISCARD might not be the best way
> to attack that problem. There might b
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 3:20 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> Looking at discard all, I was a bit suprised that 'DISCARD PLANS;'
> doesn't clear out cached stored procedures. To be honest, that's one
> of the main reasons I'd see to use it. I thought there had been some
> discussion
Greetings,
Looking at discard all, I was a bit suprised that 'DISCARD PLANS;'
doesn't clear out cached stored procedures. To be honest, that's one
of the main reasons I'd see to use it. I thought there had been some
discussion in the archives related to invalidating stored procedure
pl
15 matches
Mail list logo
