From: | Rod Taylor <rod(dot)taylor(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Suppressing unused subquery output columns |
Date: | 2014-06-06 02:52:55 |
Message-ID: | CAKddOFAKSL-FU8yC-AXOxH8XNF-y1C-LAoJv8_RK3-kY=0j8Eg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 10:27 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> I'm not entirely convinced that it's worth the extra planning cycles,
> though. Given the small number of complaints to date, it might not
> be worth doing this. Thoughts?
>
Would this avoid execution of expensive functions in views when their
output is discarded?
-- On 9.3
CREATE TABLE data (col1 serial primary key);
INSERT INTO data DEFAULT VALUES;
INSERT INTO data DEFAULT VALUES;
CREATE OR REPLACE VIEW v AS select *, (pg_sleep(1))::text FROM data;
t=# explain analyze select col1 from v;
QUERY
PLAN
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subquery Scan on v (cost=0.00..76.00 rows=2400 width=4) (actual
time=1001.086..2002.217 rows=2 loops=1)
-> Seq Scan on data (cost=0.00..52.00 rows=2400 width=4) (actual
time=1001.083..2002.210 rows=2 loops=1)
Total runtime: 2002.268 ms
(3 rows)
regards,
Rod
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2014-06-06 02:54:16 | Re: Suppressing unused subquery output columns |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2014-06-06 02:27:24 | Suppressing unused subquery output columns |