Re: [HACKERS] empty concatenate

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.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  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.