On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 12:03 PM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> On 2016-04-27 11:59:39 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> Masahiko Sawada posted a patch that fixes the problem for him, which
>> does not involve any new WAL record type. It also seems to be fixing
>> the problem in a way that is clean and consistent with what we've done
>> elsewhere.
>
> It only fixes one symptom, the relcache entry is still wrong
> afterwards. Which is pretty relevant for planning.
>
>
>> The patch actually under discussion here manages to introduce a new
>> WAL record type without fixing that problem.
>
> It does fix the problem, just not in a super robust way. Which is why I
> think we should add something like Masahiko's fix additionally.
OK, that works for me.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
