| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: explain and PARAM_EXEC |
| Date: | 2010-02-20 13:11:59 |
| Message-ID: | 603c8f071002200511l6bd204eaha4a10eb409786630@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 7:53 AM, Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:33 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> It's really not much different from a function call with subplans as
>> functions.
>
> Perhaps it would be clearer to display the "(Subplan 1)" in a function
> call style format like Subplan1(b.oid)
I thought about that, too... maybe for 9.1 we should consider it. It
might be nice to add some sort of glyph to make the user less likely
to think that Subplan1 is in fact a function. <Subplan1>(b.oid)?
${Subplan1}(b.oid)? I dunno.
...Robert
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dimitri Fontaine | 2010-02-20 13:31:01 | parallelizing subplan execution (was: explain and PARAM_EXEC) |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2010-02-20 13:10:03 | Re: explain and PARAM_EXEC |