From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: why do we need two snapshots per query? |
Date: | 2011-11-13 07:47:06 |
Message-ID: | CA+U5nMKBCnjB4HY5npvW_XFfNFLTAZjoKDoVOMRL0viU6YfqOA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 10:04 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:
>> Tom, in that earlier thread you said you'd be doing something in this
>> release about that. Can you say more about what that was, and will you
>> be doing it still?
>
> http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git&a=commitdiff&h=e6faf910d75027bdce7cd0f2033db4e912592bcc
>
> I think that largely supersedes what I understood your notion of a
> one-shot plan to be about, though perhaps I missed something?
I was looking at other use cases, specifically partitioning/partial indexes.
If we could be certain that a query was being executed immediately
then it would be possible to simplify expressions using stable
functions as if they were constants. My earlier patch did exactly
that.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2011-11-13 08:13:03 | Re: Avoiding shutdown checkpoint at failover |
Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2011-11-13 01:56:18 | Re: pg_restore --no-post-data and --post-data-only |