Re: PoC plpgsql - possibility to force custom or generic plan

From: Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)BlueTreble(dot)com>
To: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: PoC plpgsql - possibility to force custom or generic plan
Date: 2017-01-23 20:59:32
Message-ID: 1272e4cf-c0bd-8ecd-029a-8974904b95ca@BlueTreble.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 1/23/17 2:10 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> Comments, notes?

+1 on the idea. It'd also be nice if we could expose control of plans
for dynamic SQL, though I suspect that's not terribly useful without
some kind of global session storage.

A couple notes on a quick read-through:

Instead of paralleling all the existing namespace stuff, I wonder if
it'd be better to create explicit block infrastructure. AFAIK PRAGMAs
are going to have a lot of the same requirements (certainly the nesting
is the same), and we might want more of this king of stuff in the
future. (I've certainly wished I could set a GUC in a plpgsql block and
have it's settings revert when exiting the block...)

Perhaps that's as simple as renaming all the existing _ns_* functions to
_block_ and then adding support for pragmas...

Since you're adding cursor_options to PLpgSQL_expr it should probably be
removed as an option to exec_*.

finit_ would be better named free_.
--
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX
Experts in Analytics, Data Architecture and PostgreSQL
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com
855-TREBLE2 (855-873-2532)

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2017-01-23 21:00:04 Re: IndexBuild Function call fcinfo cannot access memory
Previous Message Fabien COELHO 2017-01-23 20:57:17 Re: Undefined psql variables