| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Marko Tiikkaja <marko(dot)tiikkaja(at)cs(dot)helsinki(dot)fi> |
| Cc: | Florian Pflug <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org>, Hitoshi Harada <umi(dot)tanuki(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com, depesz(at)depesz(dot)com, magnus(at)hagander(dot)net, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net |
| Subject: | Re: REVIEW: EXPLAIN and nfiltered |
| Date: | 2011-01-26 16:15:40 |
| Message-ID: | 17566.1296058540@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Marko Tiikkaja <marko(dot)tiikkaja(at)cs(dot)helsinki(dot)fi> writes:
> On 1/24/2011 7:02 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Given where we've ended up on what we want printed, I'm forced to
>> conclude that there is basically nothing usable in the submitted patch.
> I personally feel that if we could even add this for explicit Filter
> conditions, people would be a lot happier. While I agree that having
> all the fancy stuff discussed in this thread would be nice, I don't
> think they're worth postponing the Filter part to 9.2.
I think there's probably only a day or two's work involved in coding up
what I sketched. If you were to commit to doing that pretty quickly,
I'd personally be happy to regard the patch as Waiting On Author rather
than postponed to 9.2.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2011-01-26 16:16:36 | Re: SSI, simplified |
| Previous Message | Marko Tiikkaja | 2011-01-26 16:07:01 | Re: REVIEW: EXPLAIN and nfiltered |