Re: plan invalidation vs stored procedures

From: Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com>
To: Marko Kreen <markokr(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "Merlin Moncure" <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Martin Pihlak" <martin(dot)pihlak(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Pavel Stehule" <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Pg Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: plan invalidation vs stored procedures
Date: 2008-08-06 19:52:26
Message-ID: 0579E953-E0D2-4520-8D06-389896088D5C@hi-media.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hi,

Le 6 août 08 à 20:42, Marko Kreen a écrit :
> But you missed my point: if you don't have functions backed by table,
> the DROP+CREATE results in inappropriate behaviour that can be
> avoided.

Just wanted to say I agree with Marko here: it seems we have here a
pretty nice (and required) core feature which does not work all of the
time. It might be a difficult case to get right, but we certainly are
NOT getting it right now.

Whatever the workarounds, it would be nice that plan invalidation
worked whenever it makes sense, and DROP FUNCTION certainly makes
sense. Allowing REPLACE function to change return type (adding an OUT
parameter, the TABLE column list, etc) would certainly be a good
feature to add, but having existing feature set behave correctly is
more important.
It seems to qualify the complaint as a bug.

Regards,
- --
Dimitri Fontaine
PostgreSQL DBA, Architecte

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin)

iEYEARECAAYFAkiaAPsACgkQlBXRlnbh1bl3CQCgvtP09HyFgzdqWVEpmGBA4bXy
3YUAoKLCrP+2AGqmctL9IBFmpUUmdssD
=b8HX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Simon Riggs 2008-08-06 22:38:23 Re: [HACKERS] get_relation_stats_hook()
Previous Message Marko Kreen 2008-08-06 19:36:34 Re: plan invalidation vs stored procedures