| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: enable_joinremoval |
| Date: | 2010-03-29 15:27:26 |
| Message-ID: | 13795.1269876446@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> And for the record, I believe I find it rather amusing that you're
> asking me if I "have the faintest idea how many there would be".
Actually that was directed more at Simon.
> I venture to say that after yourself I might be the person who knows
> this code best. I know how many there will be, if I get my way, and
> that number is two.
If you're speaking of adding a switch for the materialize-insertion
behavior, I didn't object to that; I agree that turning that off might
be an interesting thing to do. But I remain of the opinion that a
switch to disable join removal is just useless code and user-visible
complexity.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2010-03-29 15:29:25 | Re: enable_joinremoval |
| Previous Message | Jaime Casanova | 2010-03-29 15:23:40 | Re: enable_joinremoval |