Re: Early WIP/PoC for inlining CTEs

From: Marko Tiikkaja <marko(at)joh(dot)to>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Andreas Karlsson <andreas(at)proxel(dot)se>, Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Early WIP/PoC for inlining CTEs
Date: 2019-01-27 00:15:16
Message-ID: CAL9smLAxU2ZqnSt09g6Byk9UAdAsqazVXU3n4hyq2cxxJdaWpg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sat, Jan 26, 2019 at 12:22 AM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> Therefore, I'm reversing my previous opinion that we should not have
> an explicit NOT MATERIALIZED option. I think we should add that, and
> the behavior ought to be:
>
> * No option given: inline if there's exactly one reference.
>
> * With MATERIALIZED: never inline.
>
> * With NOT MATERIALIZED: inline regardless of the number of references.
>

This much has been obvious to most people for a long time.

.m

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2019-01-27 01:53:48 Race condition in crash-recovery tests
Previous Message Tom Lane 2019-01-26 22:55:17 Re: Early WIP/PoC for inlining CTEs