| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Marti Raudsepp <marti(at)juffo(dot)org> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Jaime Casanova <jaime(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Caching for stable expressions with constant arguments v6 |
| Date: | 2012-08-27 14:52:51 |
| Message-ID: | 20120827145251.GI11088@momjian.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 05:44:32PM +0300, Marti Raudsepp wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 4:50 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> > Where are we on this?
>
> TL;DR: Got a review, requires substantial work, current github branch
> is slightly broken, will get back to this soon.
>
> Tom Lane sent a thorough review of the patch here:
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2012-03/msg00655.php
> (very much appreciated!)
>
> I have addressed some smaller points from that list in my github
> branch, but it still requires a substantial amount of work (in
> particular, the bulk of this patch which is the recursion logic in
> eval_const_expressions_mutator, needs to be changed to prevent
> unnecessary CacheExpr insertions and to store intermediate state in
> the context struct).
>
> I got a small fragment of this into PostgreSQL 9.2 as commit
> 81a646febe87964725647a36d839f6b4b405f3ae. I rebased my github branch
> on top of this commit, but the rebase introduced some test failures
> that I have not tracked down yet. I don't know if it applies to git
> HEAD any more.
>
> Sadly some other things intervened and I have not had the time to
> return to hacking on this patch. But I am hopeful I can get it into
> shape during the 9.3 cycle.
OK, thanks for the update, and your work on this.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2012-08-27 15:07:55 | Re: [GENERAL] Why extract( ... from timestamp ) is not immutable? |
| Previous Message | Kasahara Tatsuhito | 2012-08-27 14:47:28 | Re: A caveat of partitioning tables in the document |