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

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(dot)dunstan(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Petr Jelinek <petr(dot)jelinek(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] PoC plpgsql - possibility to force custom or generic plan
Date: 2018-03-01 22:10:53
Message-ID: 20180301221052.3jo5uayej2eqqsue@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2018-01-23 17:08:56 +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> 2018-01-22 23:15 GMT+01:00 Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>:
> > This really could use a new thread, imv. This thread is a year old and
> > about a completely different feature than what you've implemented here.
> >
>
> true, but now it is too late

At the very least the CF entry could be renamed moved out the procedual
language category?

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tomas Vondra 2018-03-01 22:22:46 Re: [HACKERS] MERGE SQL Statement for PG11
Previous Message Peter Geoghegan 2018-03-01 22:04:41 Re: "failed to find parent tuple for heap-only tuple" error as an ERRCODE_DATA_CORRUPTION ereport()