Re: inheritance, and plans

From: Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk>
To: tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us (Tom Lane), Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz <gryzman(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: inheritance, and plans
Date: 2009-02-07 17:58:56
Message-ID: 87eiyaqgbj.fsf@news-spur.riddles.org.uk
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

>>>>> "Tom" == Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:

[domain -> base type conversion interfering with optimization]

Tom> You seem to be laboring under the delusion that this is
Tom> considered a bug.

Of course it's a bug, or at least a missing feature - there is no
justification for putting performance deathtraps in the way of using
domains.

Tom> It's a necessary semantic restriction, because the pushed-down
Tom> expression could mean different things when applied to different
Tom> data types.

How?

Type-dependent selection of operators has already been done as part of
parse analysis, no? And the domain -> base conversion is purely a
relabelling, no? So what semantic change is possible as a result?

--
Andrew (irc:RhodiumToad)

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2009-02-08 18:34:05 Re: inheritance, and plans
Previous Message Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz 2009-02-07 17:52:56 Re: inheritance, and plans