On 5/1/15 6:32 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 3:30 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> Assuming that that sketch is accurate, it would take more code to provide >> a new user-visible knob to enable/disable the behavior than it would to >> implement the optimization, which makes me pretty much -1 on providing >> such a knob. We should either do it or not. If we do, people who want >> optimization fences should use the traditional "OFFSET 0" hack. > > +1
Not sure if I'm thrilled with the "OFFSET 0" hack but I guess it's not much different from the CTE hack I've been using. An "enable_cte_optimization" GUC would serve to keep old code from breaking while giving new users/queries the advantage of optimization. I'm not sure it's worth adding the complexity, though. In my experience not that many developers use CTEs. -- - David Steele da...@pgmasters.net
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
