From: Nikhil S. <ni...@st...> - 2013-02-15 05:50:15
|
>> > There is no way for the second session to know that there are prepared >> > statements out there, so there is no stopping it from changing the >> > preferred >> > nodes. At the same time, I do not see any need to do so. Preferred node >> > should be a dynamic non-blocking setting, very handy to tackle the >> > network >> > dynamics if needed. >> > >> >> In this case the plan cache should be invalidated and re-built afresh. >> The case should be similar to when the involved relations in a plan >> undergo a change AFAICS. >> > > When we can take care of this stuff (and without much change in the code), > without plan cache invalidation, why to go the route of cache invalidation? > Plan cache invalidation is a heavy operation in itself and its consequences > cause performance degradation. Because of plan invalidation all those plans > which are really not affected by this change, would be hit too. > You make this node ddl stuff sound like a routine activity. It's going to be once in a while, right? Regards, Nikhils -- StormDB - http://www.stormdb.com The Database Cloud Postgres-XC Support and Service |