Re: Evaluate arguments of correlated SubPlans in the referencing ExprState

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Alena Rybakina <lena(dot)ribackina(at)yandex(dot)ru>, vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Evaluate arguments of correlated SubPlans in the referencing ExprState
Date: 2024-08-01 03:24:12
Message-ID: 20240801032412.2jfqiim5zfgzsnaa@awork3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On 2024-07-19 21:17:12 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2024-07-18 16:01:19 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Alena Rybakina <lena(dot)ribackina(at)yandex(dot)ru> writes:
> > > I fixed it. The code remains the same.
> >
> > I see the cfbot is again complaining that this patch doesn't apply.
> >
> > In hopes of pushing this over the finish line, I fixed up the (minor)
> > patch conflict and also addressed the cosmetic complaints I had
> > upthread [1]. I think the attached v4 is committable. If Andres is
> > too busy, I can push it, but really it's his patch ...
>
> Thanks for the rebase - I'll try to get it pushed in the next few days!

And finally done. No code changes. I did spend some more time evaluating the
resource usage benefits actually do exist (see mail upthread).

Thanks for the reviews, rebasing and the reminders!

Greetings,

Andres

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu) 2024-08-01 03:39:56 RE: Conflict detection and logging in logical replication
Previous Message Alexander Lakhin 2024-08-01 03:00:00 v17 vs v16 performance comparison