Re: [HACKERS] PoC plpgsql - possibility to force custom or generic plan

From: Tatsuro Yamada <yamada(dot)tatsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] PoC plpgsql - possibility to force custom or generic plan
Date: 2018-07-12 10:45:47
Message-ID: 83191da0-afe8-03fd-f496-c2c08e072612@lab.ntt.co.jp
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2018/07/12 18:12, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> Hi
>
> 2018-07-10 12:01 GMT+02:00 Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com <mailto:peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>>:
>
> On 23.01.18 17:08, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> > attached updated patch
>
> This appears to be the patch of record in this thread.  I think there is
> general desire for adding a setting like this, and the implementation is
> simple enough.
>
> One change perhaps: How about naming the default setting "auto" instead
> of "default".  That makes it clearer what it does.
>
>
> I changed "default" to "auto"
>
> updated patch attached
>
> Regards
>
> Pavel

Hi Pavel,

I tested your patch on 40ca70eb.
Here is the result.

=======================
All 190 tests passed.
=======================

Thanks,
Tatsuro Yamada

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Heikki Linnakangas 2018-07-12 10:45:59 Re: [HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Remove pgbench "progress" test pending solution of its timing is (fwd)
Previous Message Thomas Munro 2018-07-12 10:42:31 Re: ON CONFLICT DO NOTHING on pg_dump