Sv: Re: Early WIP/PoC for inlining CTEs

From: Andreas Joseph Krogh <andreas(at)visena(dot)com>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Sv: Re: Early WIP/PoC for inlining CTEs
Date: 2019-02-02 21:42:31
Message-ID: VisenaEmail.56.6d12f3dd58dcac69.168b0276109@tc7-visena
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

På lørdag 02. februar 2019 kl. 20:01:01, skrev Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us
<mailto:tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>>: [snip]
There's nothing particularly stopping us from accepting
"materialized" with a D in this syntax, instead of or in addition
to "materialize"; though I hesitate to mention it for fear of
another round of bikeshedding.   +1 for keeping it "imperative-style"
– MATERIALIZE – consistent with other SQL-stuff.   --
Andreas Joseph Krogh

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2019-02-02 23:34:36 Re: initdb --allow-group-access behaviour in windows
Previous Message Tom Lane 2019-02-02 20:48:41 Re: Refactoring IndexPath representation of index conditions