Re: Query plans for plpgsql triggers

From: "Eric B(dot) Ridge" <ebr(at)tcdi(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Postgresql <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Query plans for plpgsql triggers
Date: 2006-03-25 05:46:49
Message-ID: 10F0FB1B-4323-4954-AA9A-2028EC89EF96@tcdi.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Mar 25, 2006, at 12:24 AM, Tom Lane wrote:

> This is the sort of detail that you really should not omit.

Yeah, it didn't even occur to me until I ran the "explain execute foo
(42)" thing you suggested. We've been using these update rules for
so long that I just think of the views as regular tables (rules are
great, btw).

> If you were using something newer than 7.4 then I'd ask for a complete
> test case so I could look into improving the behavior --- but as it
> is,
> I'd first suggest upgrading and seeing if the problem is already
> fixed.

We're working towards an upgrade to 8.1.3, and a new schema. Both of
which will likely provide all sorts of new "behaviors."

I'm now curious if complex rules can influence the planner in
negative ways. I don't see how they could -- I've never seen
unexpected EXPLAIN output via psql. However, I can try to work up a
test case against 7.4.12 if you think it'll be beneficial. It'll
take a few days and if you wanted 2 million-ish sample rows, be very
large.

eric

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2006-03-25 05:58:15 Re: Query plans for plpgsql triggers
Previous Message Tom Lane 2006-03-25 05:24:04 Re: Query plans for plpgsql triggers