Re: PostgreSQL 10 changes in exclusion constraints - did something change? CASE WHEN behavior oddity

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "'Andres Freund'" <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Regina Obe <lr(at)pcorp(dot)us>, "'Mark Dilger'" <hornschnorter(at)gmail(dot)com>, "'PostgreSQL-development'" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL 10 changes in exclusion constraints - did something change? CASE WHEN behavior oddity
Date: 2017-06-08 17:50:57
Message-ID: 4838.1496944257@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"'Andres Freund'" <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> On 2017-06-08 11:57:49 -0400, Regina Obe wrote:
>> My main concern in these cases is the short-circuiting not happening.

> Note there's also no short-circuiting e.g. for aggregates inside case
> either.

Well, depends. If const-folding manages to get rid of the aggregate
call altogether, it won't be computed.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Fabien COELHO 2017-06-08 17:56:02 Re: pgbench tap tests & minor fixes
Previous Message Heikki Linnakangas 2017-06-08 17:48:31 Re: PG10 transition tables, wCTEs and multiple operations on the same table