| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Paul Ramsey <pramsey(at)cleverelephant(dot)ca> |
| Cc: | Adam Brightwell <adam(dot)brightwell(at)crunchydata(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Peter Geoghegan <peter(dot)geoghegan(at)crunchydata(dot)com>, Joe Conway <joe(at)crunchydata(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Changing SQL Inlining Behaviour (or...?) |
| Date: | 2019-01-21 00:08:11 |
| Message-ID: | 15978.1548029291@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
I wrote:
> I'll try to sketch up a more concrete plan soon.
I've posted some preliminary design ideas at
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/15193.1548028093@sss.pgh.pa.us
and
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/15289.1548028233@sss.pgh.pa.us
While there's a nontrivial amount of work needed to make that happen,
I think it's doable, and it would lead to a significantly better
solution than proceeding along the inlining path could do. My
current feeling, therefore, is that we should reject this patch
(or at least stick it in the deep freeze) and go work on that plan.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kato, Sho | 2019-01-21 00:09:32 | RE: Delay locking partitions during INSERT and UPDATE |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2019-01-20 23:50:33 | Allowing extensions to find out the OIDs of their member objects |