From: | Etsuro Fujita <fujita(dot)etsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Use %u to print user mapping's umid and userid |
Date: | 2016-05-12 04:18:43 |
Message-ID: | 79e7c60c-9f89-2d57-dbdc-6d68f9111f39@lab.ntt.co.jp |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2016/05/12 13:02, Tom Lane wrote:
> Etsuro Fujita <fujita(dot)etsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
>> On 2016/05/11 18:03, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
>>> A call to GetForeignTable would incur a catalog lookup which means a
>>> catalog table/index scan if corresponding entry is not in the cache.
>>> This is followed by GetUserMapping() which is another catalog access.
>>> That's bound to be expensive than an makeOid(), oidVal() call.
>> Right, but such lookups have been incurred at the planning time (ie,
>> build_simple_rel), and corresponding entries would be in the cache. So,
>> the overhead in that recalculation at the execution time would be not
>> that large in practice. No?
> It's a mistake to assume that execution immediately follows planning.
Yeah, that would not be the case in PREPARE/EXECUTE, right?
> Having said that, I wonder whether you should be thinking less about
> performance and more about correctness. Is a user mapping lookup done
> at plan time still valid at execution, and if so what ensures that?
I think if scanning a foreign join, the user mapping is still valid at
execution, and that is ensured by RevalidateChachedQuery, IIUC.
Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Craig Ringer | 2016-05-12 05:49:32 | Re: Academic help for Postgres |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2016-05-12 04:02:13 | Re: Use %u to print user mapping's umid and userid |