From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Marko Kreen <markokr(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Postgres Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [9.2] Confusion over CacheRegisterSyscacheCallback |
Date: | 2012-03-07 16:16:06 |
Message-ID: | 8484.1331136966@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Marko Kreen <markokr(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Tue, Mar 06, 2012 at 04:27:11PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Or you could do like setrefs.c does, and assume you know how to
>> calculate the hash value for an OID-keyed cache.
> Ok, the hashoid() hack works. But please take it as report from
> the ground that this API is useful outside of core and it would
> be good if it stays useful.
Well, you have a point there --- what setrefs.c is doing is already
pretty grotty, and it would get more so if we added tracking of other
objects that used non-OID cache keys (though I'm not sure what those
would be).
We could expose some macros patterned after SearchSysCacheN that
take a cache identifier plus the same key values that would be
needed to search that cache, and return the hash value. Does that
seem reasonable?
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alex Shulgin | 2012-03-07 16:31:17 | Re: WIP: URI connection string support for libpq |
Previous Message | Kevin Grittner | 2012-03-07 16:09:45 | Re: a slightly stale comment |