Re: why do we need two snapshots per query?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: why do we need two snapshots per query?
Date: 2011-11-13 16:52:22
Message-ID: 7069.1321203142@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:
> It's all very well to refuse individual cases where linkage is
> required, but ISTM clear that there are many possible uses of being
> able to tell whether a plan is one-shot or not and nothing lost by
> allowing that information (a boolean) pass to the executor.

It's an interconnection between major modules that IMO we don't need.
Having the executor behave differently depending on the planning path
the query took creates complexity, which creates bugs. You haven't
produced any use-case at all that convinces me that it's worth the risk;
nor do I believe there are lots more use-cases right around the corner.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Thom Brown 2011-11-13 17:22:17 Re: Detach/attach database
Previous Message Tom Lane 2011-11-13 16:42:35 Re: Detach/attach database