| From: | "D'Arcy" "J(dot)M(dot)" Cain <darcy(at)druid(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | zakkr(at)zf(dot)jcu(dot)cz (Karel Zak - Zakkr) |
| Cc: | sszabo(at)bigpanda(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] empty concatenate |
| Date: | 1999-12-23 17:47:22 |
| Message-ID: | m121CKg-0000daC@druid.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Thus spake Karel Zak - Zakkr
> I not agree with this concept:-).
You are not alone.
> (My problem is not write query, I know SQL and coalesce()...etc. I want
> good understand current implementation.)
>
> ! Why is textcat() (and other) function called if result from this
> function is ignored, it is bad spending (my CPU is not boredom). See
> my 'C' example in my first letter...
This is the issue no matter which side of the debate you are on. I
think everyone agrees that either the function should not be called
or else the result should be used if it is. CPU is a terrible thing
to waste.
--
D'Arcy J.M. Cain <darcy(at){druid|vex}.net> | Democracy is three wolves
http://www.druid.net/darcy/ | and a sheep voting on
+1 416 425 1212 (DoD#0082) (eNTP) | what's for dinner.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Adriaan Joubert | 1999-12-23 17:53:27 | Index corruption |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 1999-12-23 17:46:07 | Re: [HACKERS] --with-mb=SQL_ASCII for 6.5.3 RPMs. |