Re: [HACKERS] RTE_NAMEDTUPLESTORE, enrtuples and comments

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Robert Haas
Тема Re: [HACKERS] RTE_NAMEDTUPLESTORE, enrtuples and comments
Дата
Msg-id CA+TgmoY4QkyvNXtwk4CNAkSAFpkMM5VunUnq-x8gMoyuW4VbuQ@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [HACKERS] RTE_NAMEDTUPLESTORE, enrtuples and comments  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Ответы Re: [HACKERS] RTE_NAMEDTUPLESTORE, enrtuples and comments  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 11:53 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> How does it break those properties?  I don't think enrtuples is being
>> modified by planning or execution as things stand.
>
> But it needs to be changeable, unless you like the proposition that we
> can never replan a query inside a trigger on the basis of new information
> about how big the transition table is.  Even if you're okay with that
> particular restriction, the NamedTupleStore stuff is supposed to be
> flexible enough to accommodate other use-cases, and some of them will
> surely not be okay with an immutable estimate for the store's size.

Hmm, true.  But even if we extracted enrtuples from the
RangeTbleEntry, there wouldn't be any mechanism to actually trigger
such a replan, would there?

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Robert Haas
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] Dropping partitioned table drops a previously detached partition
Следующее
От: Masahiko Sawada
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] Refreshing subscription relation state inside atransaction block