| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Dennis Björklund <db(at)zigo(dot)dhs(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>, Hans Spaans <pgsql-admin(at)lists(dot)hansspaans(dot)nl>, pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: concat_ws |
| Date: | 2003-08-04 13:26:25 |
| Message-ID: | 24897.1060003585@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin pgsql-hackers |
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Dennis_Bj=F6rklund?= <db(at)zigo(dot)dhs(dot)org> writes:
> On Sun, 3 Aug 2003, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I added code to inline_function to stop inlining if a parameter
>> expression to be substituted multiple times has cost greater than
>> 10*cpu_operator_cost (which roughly means that it contains more than
>> 10 operators or functions).
> When is this inlining taking place and what is the logic? I just want to
> make sure that there is no code in pg that will unfold forever, say for
> example for a recursive fac() function. From the above it sounds like that
> might be a problem.
That's already dealt with. See inline_function() in
src/backend/optimizer/util/clauses.c.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Mendola Gaetano | 2003-08-04 14:15:06 | pg_autovacuum ? |
| Previous Message | Dennis Björklund | 2003-08-04 05:44:37 | Re: concat_ws |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2003-08-04 13:28:21 | Thread-safe configuration option appears to misfunction |
| Previous Message | Lee Kindness | 2003-08-04 10:25:36 | Re: 7.4 COPY BINARY Format Change |