Re: [HACKERS] TIME QUALIFICATION

From: Vadim Mikheev <vadim(at)krs(dot)ru>
To: Jan Wieck <jwieck(at)debis(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] TIME QUALIFICATION
Date: 1999-02-12 02:26:00
Message-ID: 36C39138.2DF38421@krs.ru
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Jan Wieck wrote:
>
> So I assume the sublink->subselect, that's copied into the
> plan, is totally obsolete too at that point. The subplan has
> it's own rangetable, which is the same as the (not used) one
> in the subselect.

Exactly.

> I think I should tidy up that all to finally pass only plan
> into executor before going ahead with the deferred query
> stuff. It doesn't make sense to spend much efford now to
> prepare the system for deferred queries. It depends too much
> on where the RTE's are and how we organize them.
>
> New TopPlan could be passed down the executor instead of
> querytree. It might hold a List of rangetables. Plan and
> SubPlan then have an index telling which nth() rangetable of
> TopPlan to use for it.
>
> This would make execution preprocessing for snapshot->RTE
> assignment very easy because there's only one place to find
> ALL RTE's (no need to traverse down a tree). And it would
> substantial lower the amount of data to copy in SPI, since it
> must not save the Querytree at all.

Nice!

Vadim

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Thomas G. Lockhart 1999-02-12 03:10:02 Re: [HACKERS] Type conversion
Previous Message Tom Lane 1999-02-12 02:06:12 Re: [HACKERS] VACUUM ANALYZE problem on linux