Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Yqneh-00033I-Uw for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 08 May 2015 19:09:52 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with smtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Yqneh-00079U-Bd for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 08 May 2015 19:09:51 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:1501:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Yqneg-00077O-2Y for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Fri, 08 May 2015 19:09:50 +0000 Received: from tamriel.snowman.net ([2001:4830:167b::11]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1Yqned-00043S-OX for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Fri, 08 May 2015 19:09:48 +0000 Received: by tamriel.snowman.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 2A73C5F7AB; Fri, 8 May 2015 15:09:47 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 8 May 2015 15:09:47 -0400 From: Stephen Frost To: Tom Lane Cc: Peter Geoghegan , Andres Freund , Heikki Linnakangas , Jeff Janes , Dean Rasheed , Bruce Momjian , Pg Hackers Subject: Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT UPDATE/IGNORE 4.0 Message-ID: <20150508190946.GZ30322@tamriel.snowman.net> References: <10633.1431105922@sss.pgh.pa.us> <554CF44B.3080808@iki.fi> <20150508180636.GR12950@alap3.anarazel.de> <20150508181445.GS12950@alap3.anarazel.de> <17473.1431109846@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20150508183504.GU12950@alap3.anarazel.de> <18313.1431111562@sss.pgh.pa.us> <18691.1431112058@sss.pgh.pa.us> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="NbDrvalZG0AehVnn" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <18691.1431112058@sss.pgh.pa.us> X-Editor: Vim http://www.vim.org/ X-Info: http://www.snowman.net X-Operating-System: Linux/3.13.0-46-generic (x86_64) X-Uptime: 15:09:03 up 50 days, 57 min, 6 users, load average: 0.22, 0.15, 0.14 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Pg-Spam-Score: -0.4 (/) List-Archive: List-Help: List-ID: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Mailing-List: pgsql-hackers Precedence: bulk Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org --NbDrvalZG0AehVnn Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable * Tom Lane (tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote: > Peter Geoghegan writes: > > On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > >> Ooops. But shouldn't that have failed 100% of the time in a CCA build? > >> Or is the candidates list fairly noncritical? >=20 > > The candidates list is absolutely critical. >=20 > Oh, I was confusing CCA with RELCACHE_FORCE_RELEASE, which does something > a bit different. I wonder whether we should get rid of that symbol and > just drive the test in RelationClose off CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS. > (Ditto for CATCACHE_FORCE_RELEASE.) Or maybe make CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS > #define the other two symbols. Ah. Seems like that'd make sense to me, though I guess I'd prefer just driving it all off of CCA. Thanks! Stephen --NbDrvalZG0AehVnn Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJVTQn6AAoJEO1sijiDR2RV+XMP/0QsVaWfdhq0GjVdfnKF3M5l 3XxlEBC2QBNcNBCx+eZpxEsMZ08VqwaOr07sd+p+5itSNcX2TWq2yqD9GrpvDxlI jENE9hSQfPUkPfRV8/mWVIeDP0TKsxfYA+Y1OMQv0ltDeYLUbjcnDJKXIxelX5Iy /zgW5riAEgEESt/VswNv2CR2OFm2HmxgThlJuASG0gX6pwAKAhDUIldID7TJHZQi gFGXjsjhtCyjNfZJjgtK3xDFJ4BmR6oy2yjQPBVaU6NHqsDdv24lSSRVFbUWpvpC ltMYkDOz9Ro3X0RXskuIrvmyoTrp+QHmD7icvLpZMY2y9sj8PF9dGw2OX0wF3h4w R8MC+Ha7y8kS3bZB3M3xl8ztLkHsrkoKq5OZCKTy9pnrNpBINoMqBA4TYfXCfbUI LlLpNoWKwl52uzKIv1vivdQRffxeb89TvZniB0rUnPgEifVR0box/MQ7clL74bBx MlqViShfcI8KOadnS87lzYTzoYhz5l0AXoy5uo7XzLs5BG7jSYpZAegwTELobecQ 9C+G1Cg/l/8++WR+3YRPQP8qH+ALsyDAFRJ7RCy5TGN/Z56h093ZNkDLcKI1FzEO ru2g9UyCKdMpvlVaftvS2FFlLhvisXNmvql5scXh9FWHAXkWSoTI3TYMJagdbL5U 9Lk62f82ujs0aB9Dvbqt =9CoN -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --NbDrvalZG0AehVnn--