| From: | Surafel Temesgen <surafel3000(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | vik(dot)fearing(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com, Mark Dilger <hornschnorter(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk |
| Subject: | Re: FETCH FIRST clause PERCENT option |
| Date: | 2019-02-23 07:53:36 |
| Message-ID: | CALAY4q-0Ofi497ng49f27se5mMa0rb+9f1F8155QVWUOFccv-Q@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Feb 10, 2019 at 2:22 AM Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
wrote:
>
> I'm not sure I understand - are you saying every time the user does a
> FETCH, we have to run the outer plan from scratch? I don't see why would
> that be necessary? And if it is, how come there's no noticeable
> performance difference?
>
> Can you share a patch implementing the incremental approach, and a query
> demonstrating the issue?
>
>
I didn't implement it but its obvious that it doesn't work similarly with
previous approach.
We need different implementation and my plan was to use tuplestore per call
and clear
it after returning tuple but I see that the plan will not go far because
mainly the last returned
slot is not the last slot we get from outerPlan execution
regards
Surafel
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | John Naylor | 2019-02-23 07:54:18 | Re: WIP: Avoid creation of the free space map for small tables |
| Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2019-02-23 06:22:15 | Re: proposal: variadic argument support for least, greatest function |