On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 8:53 PM, Greg Stark <st...@mit.edu> wrote: > On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 8:49 PM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 6:54 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> Greg Stark <st...@mit.edu> writes: >>>> We're finding it more and more common for people to define partitioned >>>> table views with hundreds or thousands of union branches. >>> >>> Really? Given how poorly the system performs with that many inheritance >>> children, I've got a hard time believing either that this is common or >>> that ruleutils is your worst problem with it. >> >> Doesn't make it a bad idea to fix it. You may need hundreds or >> thousands of union branches for this to totally break the world, but >> you only need about five for it to be annoying. > > Indeed even aside from the performance questions, once you're indented > 5-10 times the indention stops being useful at all. The query would > probably be even more readable if we just made indentation modulo 40 > so once you get too far indented it "wraps around" which is not unlike > how humans actually indent things in this case.
Ha! That seems a little crazy, but *capping* the indentation at some reasonable value might not be dumb. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
