Re: fixing subplan/subquery confusion

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: fixing subplan/subquery confusion
Date: 2016-06-27 20:12:33
Message-ID: CA+TgmoZtwZUZYSsva2rf8rYtM8WWbL8H6RBdU8V-VZS5W4cApA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 4:03 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 10:39 PM, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 04:46:19PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> The above-described topic is currently a PostgreSQL 9.6 open item ("fix
>>> possible confusion between subqueries and subplans").
>
>> This open item comes with a patch submitted by Tom Lane. If Tom wants
>> me to review and (if no problems are found) commit that patch to
>> resolve this open item, I'm willing to do that. But generally I don't
>> commit patches submitted by other committers unless that person and I
>> have agreed on it in advance, which is not currently the case here.
>
>> Tom, do you want to commit this, or do you want me to handle it, or
>> something else?
>
> I was not sure if you'd agreed that the patch was correct, and in any
> case I thought you wanted to fold it into the upperrel consider_parallel
> patch. I feel no great need to commit it myself, if that's what you
> meant.

OK, I'll set aside some time for further review and either commit it
or send an update by COB Thursday US time.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2016-06-27 20:49:44 Re: fixing consider_parallel for upper planner rels
Previous Message Tom Lane 2016-06-27 20:03:56 Re: fixing subplan/subquery confusion