Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Skip to content

Commit 2c2ecdd

Browse files
Mention pg_index changes also cause relcache invalidation
Amit Langote, additional line by me
1 parent 7a3e8d7 commit 2c2ecdd

File tree

1 file changed

+4
-3
lines changed

1 file changed

+4
-3
lines changed

src/backend/utils/cache/inval.c

Lines changed: 4 additions & 3 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -51,9 +51,9 @@
5151
* PrepareToInvalidateCacheTuple() routine provides the knowledge of which
5252
* catcaches may need invalidation for a given tuple.
5353
*
54-
* Also, whenever we see an operation on a pg_class or pg_attribute tuple,
55-
* we register a relcache flush operation for the relation described by that
56-
* tuple.
54+
* Also, whenever we see an operation on a pg_class, pg_attribute, or
55+
* pg_index tuple, we register a relcache flush operation for the relation
56+
* described by that tuple (as specified in CacheInvalidateHeapTuple()).
5757
*
5858
* We keep the relcache flush requests in lists separate from the catcache
5959
* tuple flush requests. This allows us to issue all the pending catcache
@@ -1132,6 +1132,7 @@ CacheInvalidateHeapTuple(Relation relation,
11321132

11331133
/*
11341134
* Now, is this tuple one of the primary definers of a relcache entry?
1135+
* See comments in file header for deeper explanation.
11351136
*
11361137
* Note we ignore newtuple here; we assume an update cannot move a tuple
11371138
* from being part of one relcache entry to being part of another.

0 commit comments

Comments
 (0)