Re: RTE_NAMEDTUPLESTORE, enrtuples and comments

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk>
Subject: Re: RTE_NAMEDTUPLESTORE, enrtuples and comments
Date: 2017-06-13 14:05:07
Message-ID: 908.1497362707@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> Perhaps this is a silly question, but I don't particularly see what's
> wrong with:

> 3. Do nothing.

Well, the fundamental problem is that the RTE is a lousy place to keep
rowcount estimates. That breaks assorted desirable properties like
querytrees being readonly to planning/execution (not that we don't
end up copying them anyway, but up to now that's been because of bad
implementation not because the representation was broken by design).

I agree that it's probably not so badly broken that we have to fix it
in time for v10, but this is not where we want to be in the long run.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2017-06-13 14:14:18 Re: Detection of IPC::Run presence in SSL TAP tests
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2017-06-13 13:53:45 Re: pgrowlocks relkind check