Re: Early WIP/PoC for inlining CTEs

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andreas Karlsson <andreas(at)proxel(dot)se>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Early WIP/PoC for inlining CTEs
Date: 2019-01-29 04:51:58
Message-ID: 20190129045158.GD3121@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 05:05:32PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Yeah, I thought about that too, but it doesn't seem like an improvement.
> If the query is very long (which isn't unlikely) I think people would
> prefer to see the option(s) up front.

Having these options at the front of the WITH clause looks more
natural to me.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2019-01-29 05:08:30 Re: pg_upgrade: Pass -j down to vacuumdb
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2019-01-29 04:50:17 Re: pg_stat_ssl additions