From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
Cc: | Ranier Vilela <ranier(dot)vf(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Eval expression R/O once time (src/backend/executor/execExpr.c) |
Date: | 2021-09-21 22:21:24 |
Message-ID: | 2093863.1632262884@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> On 2021-09-21 15:09:11 -0300, Ranier Vilela wrote:
>> Currently when determining where CoerceToDomainValue can be read,
>> it evaluates every step in a loop.
>> But, I think that the expression is immutable and should be solved only
>> once.
> What is immutable here?
I think Ranier has a point here. The clear intent of this bit:
/*
* If first time through, determine where CoerceToDomainValue
* nodes should read from.
*/
if (domainval == NULL)
{
is that we only need to emit the EEOP_MAKE_READONLY once when there are
multiple CHECK constraints. But because domainval has the wrong lifespan,
that test is constant-true, and we'll do it over each time to little
purpose.
> And it has to, the allocation intentionally is separate for each
> constraint. As the comment even explicitly says:
> /*
> * Since value might be read multiple times, force to R/O
> * - but only if it could be an expanded datum.
> */
No, what that's on about is that each constraint might contain multiple
VALUE symbols. But once we've R/O-ified the datum, we can keep using
it across VALUE symbols in different CHECK expressions, not just one.
(AFAICS anyway)
I'm unexcited by the proposed move of the save_innermost_domainval/null
variables, though. It adds no correctness and it forces an additional
level of indentation of a good deal of code, as the patch fails to show.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jan Wieck | 2021-09-21 22:47:02 | Re: PostgreSQL High Precision Support Extension. |
Previous Message | Thomas Munro | 2021-09-21 22:20:54 | Re: PostgreSQL High Precision Support Extension. |