Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [HACKERS] Rule plan size for views?

From: Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu (Thomas G(dot) Lockhart)
Cc: jwieck(at)debis(dot)com, darrenk(at)insightdist(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Rule plan size for views?
Date: 1998-03-02 17:05:15
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> > > Sounds like the plan internally grew (possible w/subselect stuff?!?) and
> > > has gone over that 8k limit.
> >
> >     I think it must be due to the cleanups in the node-print and
> >     read funcs. They now output/read ALL fields in the nodes.
> Oh, I didn't realize that the print functions were actually used for something
> other than printing and debugging. I had started to add a few new nodes when I
> was trying to debug the "primary key" code.
> Should we go through and bracket some of those with #ifdef QUERYDEBUG or
> something like that? Where are they actually used? Should we try to keep these
> at a minimum for production compiles of the system??

Did you add stuff to dump that wasn't dumped before, or were they fields
of existing structure that used to be skipped?

They are used for the rewrite system and for views.

Bruce Momjian                          |  830 Blythe Avenue
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us              |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  (610) 353-9879(w)
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  (610) 853-3000(h)

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Thomas G. LockhartDate: 1998-03-02 17:48:15
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Rule plan size for views?
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 1998-03-02 16:49:42
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Last minute reminders (hope they're not too late...)

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2018 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group