"Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
>> I could imagine problems the planner would have to deal with though, such as
>> what type is "bogon" in this query?
>> WITH RECURSIVE x(bogon) AS (select bogon from x) select * from x;
> Just a note --- that's not the planner's problem, either. Semantic
> interpretation of the meaning of a query is supposed to be completed
> during parse analysis.
I was being sloppy. I just mean as opposed to the executor. Ie, that the code
to build the plan is harder than actually running it.
Ask me about EnterpriseDB's RemoteDBA services!
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2007-11-30 17:15:24|
|Subject: Re: CommandCounterIncrement versus plan caching |
|Previous:||From: Magnus Hagander||Date: 2007-11-30 15:48:11|
|Subject: Re: .NET or Mono functions in PG|