* Tom Lane (tgl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx) wrote: > "shakahshakah@xxxxxxxxx" <shakahshakah@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > Am I correct in assuming that when Postgres prepared the SQL to execute > > the "insert function" that the existing rules on the base table were > > also resolved at that time? If so, is there any way to avoid that > > behavior? > > Yes; no. We are working on infrastructure to automatically redo > prepared plans when relevant catalog entries change, but it's not there > today :-( Wouldn't it be possible to use 'execute' instead and have the plan re-generated each time that way? It'd be less efficient but I think it'd work as a work-around... Just some thoughts, Thanks, Stephen
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
