Re: [HACKERS] PoC plpgsql - possibility to force custom or generic plan

On 1/23/17 2:10 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:

Comments, notes?

+1 on the idea. It'd also be nice if we could expose control of plans for dynamic SQL, though I suspect that's not terribly useful without some kind of global session storage.

A couple notes on a quick read-through:

Instead of paralleling all the existing namespace stuff, I wonder if it'd be better to create explicit block infrastructure. AFAIK PRAGMAs are going to have a lot of the same requirements (certainly the nesting is the same), and we might want more of this king of stuff in the future. (I've certainly wished I could set a GUC in a plpgsql block and have it's settings revert when exiting the block...)

Perhaps that's as simple as renaming all the existing _ns_* functions to _block_ and then adding support for pragmas...

Since you're adding cursor_options to PLpgSQL_expr it should probably be removed as an option to exec_*.

finit_ would be better named free_.

--
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX
Experts in Analytics, Data Architecture and PostgreSQL
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com
855-TREBLE2 (855-873-2532)