Re: Optimze usage of immutable functions as relation

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Andres Freund
Тема Re: Optimze usage of immutable functions as relation
Дата
Msg-id 20190216014332.ifjqaaew4tfvzpnk@alap3.anarazel.de
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Optimze usage of immutable functions as relation  (Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at>)
Ответы Re: Optimze usage of immutable functions as relation  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On 2018-11-08 15:08:03 +0100, Antonin Houska wrote:
> Aleksandr Parfenov <asp437@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > I fixed a typo and some comments. Please find new version attached.
> 
> I've checked this verstion too.
> 
> * is_simple_stable_function()
> 
> instead of fetching HeapTuple from the syscache manually, you might want to
> consider using functions from lsyscache.c (get_func_rettype, get_func_retset,
> etc.), or adding a function that returns (subset of) the fields you need in a
> single call.
> 
> * pull_up_simple_function():
> 
> As you assume that ret->functions is a single-item list
> 
>     Assert(list_length(rte->functions) == 1);
> 
> the following iteration is not necessary:
> 
>     foreach(lc, functions_list)
> 
> Also, there seems to be a lot of copy & paste from pull_up_simple_values(), so
> some refactoring would make sense.

Given this I think the appropriate state of the CF entry would have been
waiting-for-author, not needs review. Or alternatively
returned-with-feedback or rejected.  I'm a bit confused as to why the
patch was moved to the next CF twice?

- Andres


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Michael Paquier
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Channel binding
Следующее
От: Tomas Vondra
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [Patch][WiP] Tweaked LRU for shared buffers