Re: More WITH

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, PG Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: More WITH
Date: 2015-08-21 18:28:48
Message-ID: CA+Tgmobba9d6O97LTfyo0PAQKf_gGY9xZytFcF=APVcDJE7LLA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 11:23 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> More generally, what would you hope to accomplish with such a construct
> that wouldn't be better done by writing the cursor's underlying query
> directly in the WITH clause?

Maybe I'm stupid today, but it seems like the obvious use case would
be fetching some but not all rows from the cursor?

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2015-08-21 18:31:12 Re: Reduce ProcArrayLock contention
Previous Message Tom Lane 2015-08-21 18:10:57 Re: Warnings around booleans