Re: [HACKERS] Another nasty cache problem - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Another nasty cache problem
Date
Msg-id 200002010154.UAA21581@candle.pha.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Another nasty cache problem  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
> I am starting to think that Bruce's idea might be the way to go: lock
> down any cache entry that's been referenced since the last transaction
> start or CommandCounterIncrement, and elog() if it's changed by
> invalidation.  Then the only coding rule needed is "cached tuples don't
> stay valid across CommandCounterIncrement", which is relatively
> simple to check for.

Yea, I had a good idea ...

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610)
853-3000+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026
 


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Philip Warner
Date:
Subject: The Apache Model (was Re: Copyright)
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] freefuncs.c is never called from anywhere!?