Jan Wieck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I haven't looked at the code, but pg_class only has a boolean
> telling if a class has rules or not. Could it be that adding
> more rules (or dropping just a few instead of all) doesn't
> update the pg_class tuple, thus the syscache for the table
> isn't invalidated and other backends continue to use the old
> information instead of rescanning pg_rewrite?
This is done correctly in current sources --- see
setRelhasrulesInRelation(). However I recall having dorked with that
code not long ago, and I forget what it looked like before. Perhaps
7.0.* is broken in this respect? Would think people would have noticed,
though.
regards, tom lane
- Re: [SQL] Continuous inserts... Poul L. Christiansen
- Re: [SQL] Continuous inserts... brianb-pgsql
- Re: [SQL] Continuous inserts... Stephan Szabo
- Re: [SQL] Continuous inserts... Joerg Hessdoerfer
- Re: [SQL] Continuous inserts... Poul L. Christiansen
- Re: [SQL] Continuous inserts... Joerg Hessdoerfer
- Re: [SQL] Continuous inserts... Stephan Szabo
- Re: [SQL] Continuous inserts... Joerg Hessdoerfer
- Re: [SQL] Continuous inserts... Stephan Szabo
- Re: [SQL] Continuous inserts... Jan Wieck
- Re: [SQL] Continuous insert... Tom Lane
- Re: [SQL] Continuous insert... Joerg Hessdoerfer
- Re: [SQL] Continuous inserts... Webb Sprague
- Re: [SQL] Continuous inserts... Joerg Hessdoerfer
