"David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > So I found where this difference in behavior is at least explicitly noted: >/* > * If it's a named composite type (or domain over one), find the typcache > * entry and record the current tupdesc ID, so we can detect changes > * (including drops). We don't currently support on-the-fly replacement > * of non-composite types, else we might want to do this for them too. > */ I'm not quite sure that that's related, really. That code is concerned with detecting changes to an already-identified type (that is, type OID NNN has different details now than it did before). It seemed to me that Bryn's question was more about reacting to cases where a given string of source code would resolve to a different type OID than it did a moment ago. We don't have a great story on that, I'll agree. You can get into that sort of problem without anywhere near the amount of complexity embodied in this example --- for instance, I'm pretty sure we don't re-parse type references just because somebody else executed an ALTER TYPE RENAME somewhere. regards, tom lane
