From: | "Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp> |
---|---|
To: | "The Hermit Hacker" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> |
Cc: | <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
Subject: | RE: [HACKERS] Bug report for 7.0beta1 in 'CREATE FUNCTION...' |
Date: | 2000-03-01 05:56:43 |
Message-ID: | 000701bf8342$ebc500e0$2801007e@tpf.co.jp |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
> [mailto:owner-pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org]On Behalf Of Hiroshi Inoue
> Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2000 11:06 AM
> To: The Hermit Hacker
> Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
> Subject: RE: [HACKERS] Bug report for 7.0beta1 in 'CREATE FUNCTION...'
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
> > [mailto:owner-pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org]On Behalf Of The Hermit
> > Hacker
> >
> >
> > Can someone look into this, and followup with Don? :)
> >
>
> Currently utility commands aren't executable in PL/pgSQL.
> In short,it's due the lack of implementation of copyObject()
> for UtilityStatements.
> However,there's another essential problem.
>
> PL/pgSQL caches prepared plans for fucntions at their
> first execution time. Though many oids/numbers ... exist
> in the cached plans,they are changed by DML statements
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Oops sorry,DDL not DML statement.
> and cached plans would become invalid. Currently once
> a plan is cached,it stays in TopMemoryContext forever
> and would never be removed/changed.
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Thomas Lockhart | 2000-03-01 06:14:51 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] prob with aggregate and group by - returns multiplesh |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2000-03-01 05:42:14 | Re: [HACKERS] minor bug in 7.0: casting |