On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 6:51 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > It does sounds a legitimate feature request to me. I don't remember if > we honored the request to add resetting of cached sequences, though; if > we didn't, this one is probably going to be tough too. >
+1 > Another point is that to implement this I think there will need to be > another per-PL entry point to discard session data; are we okay with > that? Since this probably means a new column in pg_language, we > couldn't even consider the idea of back-patching. Unless we add a hook, > which is registered in the PL's _PG_init()? > This week I had some similar trouble, but using "dblink" and "pgbouncer". As expected "DISCARD ALL" don't clear the extension resources. I was thinking if is possible to every extension register his own "discard" procedure and then the "DISCARD ALL" can execute all registered extension cleanup procedures. Makes sense? > Are we going to backpatch a doc change that says "releases all temporary > resources, except for plptyhon's and plperl's GD"? Surely not ... > Maybe this doc can be like that: "releases all temporary resources, except for extensions" Grettings, -- Fabrízio de Royes Mello Consultoria/Coaching PostgreSQL >> Timbira: http://www.timbira.com.br >> Blog sobre TI: http://fabriziomello.blogspot.com >> Perfil Linkedin: http://br.linkedin.com/in/fabriziomello >> Twitter: http://twitter.com/fabriziomello
