On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 12:03 PM, Andres Freund <and...@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
> 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.
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org)
To make changes to your subscription: