| From: | Marko Tiikkaja <marko(dot)tiikkaja(at)cs(dot)helsinki(dot)fi> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Alex Hunsaker <badalex(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Writeable CTE patch |
| Date: | 2009-11-26 18:39:28 |
| Message-ID: | 4B0ECB60.5010609@cs.helsinki.fi |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> What this misses is EvalPlanQual, which can require
> initialization of a new plan tree during execution.
Agh. You're right, I missed that.
> When I realized this, my first thought was that we might as well drop
> all the proposed changes that involve avoiding use of
> es_result_relation_info. I was wondering though whether you had a
> functional reason for getting rid of them, or if it was just trying to
> tidy the code a bit?
The latter.
> However,
> since OIDs in user tables have been deprecated for several versions
> now, I'm thinking that maybe the case doesn't arise often enough to
> justify keeping such a wart in the executor.
Under the circumstances I'd lean towards this option.
Regards,
Marko Tiikkaja
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Oleg Bartunov | 2009-11-26 18:53:14 | Re: force index problem in 8.4.1 |
| Previous Message | Boszormenyi Zoltan | 2009-11-26 18:27:04 | Re: ECPG patch 1, dynamic cursorname |