Re: [HACKERS] CTE inlining
| От | Tom Lane |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: [HACKERS] CTE inlining |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 19072.1493526526@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение |
| Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] CTE inlining (Craig Ringer <craig.ringer@2ndquadrant.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] CTE inlining
Re: [HACKERS] CTE inlining Re: [HACKERS] CTE inlining Re: [HACKERS] CTE inlining |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Craig Ringer <craig.ringer@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> - as you noted, it is hard to decide when it's worth inlining vs
> materializing for CTE terms referenced more than once.
[ raised eyebrow... ] Please explain why the answer isn't trivially
"never".
There's already a pretty large hill to climb here in the way of
breaking peoples' expectations about CTEs being optimization
fences. Breaking the documented semantics about CTEs being
single-evaluation seems to me to be an absolute non-starter.
regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: