Re: some last patches breaks plan cache
От | Tomas Vondra |
---|---|
Тема | Re: some last patches breaks plan cache |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 5d95afc4-0ed0-897f-6e9d-75331caed98a@2ndquadrant.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: some last patches breaks plan cache (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: some last patches breaks plan cache
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 04/04/2018 07:54 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com> writes: >> This should do the trick - I've failed to realize exec_stmt_call may >> exit by calling elog(ERROR) too, in which case the plan pointer was not >> reset. > >> This does fix the failures presented here, but I don't think it's the >> right solution > > No, it's completely unacceptable. > Yes, I realize that and I was not really suggesting this as a proper fix. It was meant more to demonstrate that it's still the same issue with the same dangling pointer. > If there's really no other way, you could use a PG_TRY block to > ensure that the pointer gets reset on the way out. But I question > why we've got a design that requires that in the first place. It's > likely to have more problems than this. > I agree it needs a solution that does not require us to track and manually reset pointers on random places. No argument here. regards -- Tomas Vondra http://www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: