| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(dot)dunstan(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, 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: PoC plpgsql - possibility to force custom or generic plan |
| Date: | 2017-09-08 21:14:15 |
| Message-ID: | 31885.1504905255@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> We already have 'SET LOCAL', which manages scope to the current
> transaction. How about SET BLOCK which would set until you've left
> the current statement block?
(1) I do not think this approach will play terribly well in any of the
PLs; their notions of statement blocks all differ from whatever we might
think that is at the interactive-SQL-command level.
(2) AIUI the feature request is specifically for a single-statement
variable change, not any larger scope than that.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David G. Johnston | 2017-09-08 21:16:05 | Re: PoC plpgsql - possibility to force custom or generic plan |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2017-09-08 21:09:37 | Re: PoC plpgsql - possibility to force custom or generic plan |