so 18. 5. 2024 v 18:31 odesílatel Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@alvh.no-ip.org> napsal:
> On 2024-Jan-30, Dmitry Dolgov wrote: > > > Yep, in this constellation the implementation holds much better (in > > terms of memory) in my create/let/drop testing. > > > > I've marked the CF item as ready for committer, but a note for anyone > > who would like to pick up it from here -- we're talking about first 5 > > patches here, up to the memory cleaning after DROP VARIABLE. It doesn't > > mean the rest is somehow not worth it, but I believe it's a good first > > step. > > Hmm, I think patch 16 is essential, because the point of variable shadowing > is a critical aspect of how the whole thing works. So I would say that > a first step would be those first five patches plus 16. > I'll move patch 16 to 6 position Regards Pavel > > I want to note that when we discussed this patch series at the dev > meeting in FOSDEM, a sort-of conclusion was reached that we didn't want > schema variables at all because of the fact that creating a variable > would potentially change the meaning of queries by shadowing table > columns. But this turns out to be incorrect: it's _variables_ that are > shadowed by table columns, not the other way around. > > -- > Álvaro Herrera PostgreSQL Developer — > https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/ > "No hay ausente sin culpa ni presente sin disculpa" (Prov. francés) >
