Re: PoC plpgsql - possibility to force custom or generic plan

From: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Petr Jelinek <petr(dot)jelinek(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com>
Subject: Re: PoC plpgsql - possibility to force custom or generic plan
Date: 2017-04-06 06:09:29
Message-ID: CAFj8pRACsUz48mkA2kA7Lfp5K2_uUVFsjOf9CMJ==3hy6ufovA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

>
> That echoes my perception - so let's move this to the next CF? It's not
> like this patch has been pending for very long.
>

sure

Regards

Pavel

>
> - Andres
>

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Heikki Linnakangas 2017-04-06 06:12:25 Re: Outdated comments around HandleFunctionRequest
Previous Message Pavel Stehule 2017-04-06 06:08:13 Re: PoC plpgsql - possibility to force custom or generic plan