Re: Early WIP/PoC for inlining CTEs

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andreas Karlsson <andreas(at)proxel(dot)se>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Early WIP/PoC for inlining CTEs
Date: 2019-02-14 15:11:29
Message-ID: 11919.1550157089@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

... so, have we beaten this topic to death yet? Can we make a decision?

Personally, I'd be happy with either of the last two patch versions
I posted (that is, either AS [[NOT] MATERIALIZED] or
AS [MATERIALIZE [ON|OFF]] syntax). But we gotta pick something.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Adrian Phinney 2019-02-14 15:11:45 COPY support for parameters
Previous Message Evgeniy Efimkin 2019-02-14 15:04:33 Re: [WIP] CREATE SUBSCRIPTION with FOR TABLES clause (table filter)