Re: [HACKERS] indexes and floats

From: Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: vadim(at)krs(dot)ru (Vadim Mikheev)
Cc: lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu, tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us, hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] indexes and floats
Date: 1998-08-06 15:41:06
Message-ID: 199808061541.LAA07831@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> Thomas G. Lockhart wrote:
> >
> > > istm that we should be focusing on Vadim's hints on what it would take
> > > to use indices with function calls on constants...
> >
> > Looking at Vadim's note again, maybe it will be the parser's duty to
> > insert the PARAM_EXEC node; will need more details or some time to look
> > at it...
>
> Sorry, but maybe it would be better to add new attribute
> to pg_proc (and change CREATE FUNCTION syntax) to let
> parser know does result of function call on constants depend
> on execution time or not. This would be much better just
> execute function in parser and replace function with
> constant.
> Currently, only random(), now() and SPI-functions should be
> replaced by PARAM_EXEC, all others could be evaluated by parser.

I see. We have pg_proc.proiscachable. This looks like a good
candidate, and is not used for anything currently. Maybe rename it to
something clearer.

--
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

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 1998-08-06 15:43:02 Re: AW: [HACKERS] Large objects names
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 1998-08-06 15:37:25 Re: [HACKERS] OR clause status