From: | Andrew Sullivan <ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca> |
---|---|
To: | De Leeuw Guy <G(dot)De_Leeuw(at)eurofer(dot)be> |
Cc: | Andrew Sullivan <ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca>, pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: cache problem (v2) |
Date: | 2007-07-16 20:36:41 |
Message-ID: | 20070716203641.GF18049@phlogiston.dyndns.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin |
On Mon, Jul 16, 2007 at 10:22:33PM +0200, De Leeuw Guy wrote:
> >
> Yes, but maybe the post are too big, can I send it to your address ?
> It's written in C
Well, sending it to me will do you zero good, as my C skills are
awful. Assuming it's a reasonable size, I think the list will take
it.
> > There is nothing in the cache that isn't "in the database", as it
> > were, but there are visibility rules that might be affecting you.
> >
> visibility rules ?
You can see things that happened in your own transaction, but nobody
else can. If you're working READ COMMITTED, you can also see work
that other transactions commit while you were working. Could any of
that be affecting you? Unless your own function is doing something
with some cache, I am positive there's no cache issue here as you
describe it.
A
--
Andrew Sullivan | ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca
Unfortunately reformatting the Internet is a little more painful
than reformatting your hard drive when it gets out of whack.
--Scott Morris
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | De Leeuw Guy | 2007-07-16 20:50:13 | Re: cache problem (v2) |
Previous Message | De Leeuw Guy | 2007-07-16 20:22:33 | Re: cache problem (v2) |