Re: [HACKERS] Cached plans and statement generalization
От | Finnerty, Jim |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Cached plans and statement generalization |
Дата | |
Msg-id | B1FAE502-7CA7-4122-B37E-3CA1F174D997@amazon.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Cached plans and statement generalization (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 4/25/17, 6:34 PM, "pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org on behalf of Andres Freund" <pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.orgon behalf of andres@anarazel.de> wrote: It's not always that simple, at least in postgres, unless you disregard search_path. Consider e.g. cases like CREATESCHEMA a; CREATE SCHEMA b; CREATE TABLE a.foobar(somecol int); SET search_patch = 'b,a'; SELECT * FROM foobar; CREATE TABLE b.foobar(anothercol int); SELECT * FROM foobar; -- may not be cached plan from before! it sounds- my memory of DB2 is very faint, and I never used it much - like similar issues could arise in DB2 too? Greetings, Andres Freund -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changesto your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers You may need to store the reloid of each relation in the cached query to ensure that the schema bindings are the same, andalso invalidate dependent cache entries if a referenced relation is dropped. Regards, Jim Finnerty
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: