Re: Perfomance bug in v10

From: Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Claudio Freire <klaussfreire(at)gmail(dot)com>, David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Perfomance bug in v10
Date: 2017-06-02 17:28:21
Message-ID: 33693ef2-3bb6-20f1-1907-2b8ea359f048@sigaev.ru
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> BTW, was the larger query plan that you showed (with a Materialize node)
> generated by 9.6, or v10 HEAD? Because I would be surprised if 9.6 did
v10,
commit acbd8375e954774181b673a31b814e9d46f436a5
Author: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Date: Fri Jun 2 11:18:24 2017 +0200

--
Teodor Sigaev E-mail: teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru
WWW: http://www.sigaev.ru/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Khandekar 2017-06-02 17:34:45 Re: strcmp() tie-breaker for identical ICU-collated strings
Previous Message Pavel Stehule 2017-06-02 17:05:09 Re: proposal: PLpgSQL parallel assignemnt