On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 1:45 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 1:22 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>> So: exactly what is the intended behavioral change as of now, and what
>>> is the argument supporting that change?
>> IIUC, this is the result of countless rounds of communal bikeshedding around:
> Quite :-(. But I'm not sure where the merry-go-round stopped.
> Please notice that the very terms of discussion in that message depend
> on a view of wCTEs that has got nothing to do with what was applied.
> I'm afraid that the goals of this patch might be similarly obsolete.
No, I don't think so. IIUC, the problem is that EXPLAIN ANALYZE runs
the rewrite products with different snapshot handling than the regular
execution path. So in theory you could turn on auto_explain and have
the semantics of your queries change. That would be Bad.
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Robert Haas||Date: 2011-02-28 18:59:02|
|Subject: Re: knngist - 0.8|
|Previous:||From: Robert Haas||Date: 2011-02-28 18:54:23|
|Subject: Re: Why our counters need to be time-based WAS: WIP: cross
column correlation ...|