| From: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | msalais(at)msym(dot)fr |
| Cc: | Ba Jinsheng <bajinsheng(at)u(dot)nus(dot)edu>, Andrei Lepikhov <lepihov(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: CTE Inline On TPC-DS Query 95 |
| Date: | 2024-12-27 11:40:54 |
| Message-ID: | CAApHDvopLOxy+FSBmu3j6OaBivj7B-ycDQgUDVPfr__HVTsi=g@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Sat, 28 Dec 2024 at 00:34, <msalais(at)msym(dot)fr> wrote:
> Sometimes one is better and sometimes the other is best.
> In Oracle, the choice is done by COST. This should be the same for PostgreSQL. In essence, it is the same thing for views: inlining or materializing...
I don't doubt you. However, I did already mention the cost part in the
final paragraph of my email and I also hinted on why it might be more
difficult than you might imagine to implement. I don't want to put
anyone off making improvements in this area. I only aim to highlight
that it's not trivial to do so.
David
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | msalais | 2024-12-27 11:54:52 | RE: Reg. Postgres Unique contraint |
| Previous Message | msalais | 2024-12-27 11:34:17 | RE: CTE Inline On TPC-DS Query 95 |