From: | Serge Fonville <serge(dot)fonville(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Craig Ringer <ringerc(at)ringerc(dot)id(dot)au> |
Cc: | Liam Caffrey <liam(dot)caffrey(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: CTE materializing sets? |
Date: | 2012-10-09 09:53:10 |
Message-ID: | CAOAS_+K0cWDma4+51gdyJVBAE9Jc-8C=POgV1-_o09_x4OKEZQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
This indeed is a very interesting question.
At http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/CTEReadme it seems to suggest that a CTE
is just rewritten and the resulting query is executed.
Kind regards/met vriendelijke groet,
Serge Fonville
Convince Microsoft!
They need to add TRUNCATE PARTITION in SQL Server
https://connect.microsoft.com/SQLServer/feedback/details/417926/truncate-partition-of-partitioned-table
2012/10/9 Craig Ringer <ringerc(at)ringerc(dot)id(dot)au>
> On 10/06/2012 08:45 AM, Liam Caffrey wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> If I run a CTE does that materialize the resulting data in the same (or
>> a similar) way as if I created a temp table and referred to that
>> instead? Or does the CTE keep the set in memory?
>>
>
> Really good question, I too would be interested in this.
>
> I'd expect it'd materialize to RAM if the result is within `work_mem` but
> I'd love to know for sure.
>
> --
> Craig Ringer
>
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/**mailpref/pgsql-general<http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general>
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tomas Vondra | 2012-10-09 10:08:55 | Re: CTE materializing sets? |
Previous Message | Craig Ringer | 2012-10-09 09:48:42 | Re: CTE materializing sets? |