On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 08:47, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 9:06 PM, Alex Hunsaker <bada...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 02:09, Jan Urbański <wulc...@wulczer.org> wrote: >>> On 27/01/11 22:42, Jan Urbański wrote: >>>> On 23/12/10 14:50, Jan Urbański wrote: >>>>> Here's a patch implementing properly invalidating functions that have >>>>> composite type arguments after the type changes, as mentioned in >>>>> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2010-12/msg01991.php. It's >>>>> an incremental patch on top of the plpython-refactor patch sent eariler. >>>> >>>> Updated to master. >>> >>> Again. >> >> Looks good, it works as described, the code is clean and well >> documented and it passes the added regression tests. >> >> I took the liberty of looking at the other pls to see how they handled >> this to find they don't cache them in the first place. For fun, I >> hacked plpython to not cache to see if there was any performance >> difference pre patch, post patch and in the non-cached cases. I >> couldn't find any probably due to: >> 1) my simple test case (select >> count(test_composite_table_input('(John, 100, "(10)")')) FROM >> generate_series(1, 1000000);) >> 2) things being cached >> 3) cache invalidation having to do most of the work that the non >> caching cache does. I think there is one or two more SearchSysCall's. >> 4) overhead from cassert >> >> It seems a bit heavy handed to invalidate and remake the entire >> plpython function whenever we hit this case. I think we could get away >> with setting ->is_rowtype = 2 in PLy_procedure_valid() instead. I >> suppose it should be fairly rare case anyway so... *shrug*. > > This last comment might make me think that we're looking for a new > version of this patch, but the comment on the CommitFest application > says "looks good". So I'm not sure whether this should be marked > Waiting on Author or Ready for Committer, but the current status of > Needs Review looks wrong.
Drat, Ive been found it. I just didn't want to make things to easy for you. :) -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers