Hi,
On 2017-11-21 10:16:58 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> I'm also wondering about folding CaseTestExpr and CoerceToDomainValue
> into the same mechanism. It's not very hard to see those cases as
> being the same as a function-based lambda.
Yea, that'd be good. The current mechanisms is uh, historical
On 2017-11-21 09:59:00 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 2:51 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> > Right, but it doesn't sound that hard to introduce. Basically there'd need
> > to be a WithParamValue node, that first evaluates parameters and then
> > executes the child expression. I'
I wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
>> I don't quite follow the need for this. I mean, if we just stick a
>> Param reference in there and create a corresponding InitPlan, the
>> Param will be evaluated on demand, right? Is the point of the new
>> node to make sure that the Param gets re-evaluated whe
Robert Haas writes:
> On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 2:51 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>> Right, but it doesn't sound that hard to introduce. Basically there'd
>> need to be a WithParamValue node, that first evaluates parameters and
>> then executes the child expression.
> I don't quite follow the need fo
On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 2:51 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> Right, but it doesn't sound that hard to introduce. Basically there'd need to
> be a WithParamValue node, that first evaluates parameters and then executes
> the child expression. I'm thinking of doing this hierarchically so there's
> les
On November 17, 2017 5:15:57 AM PST, Paul Ramsey
wrote:
>On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 12:37 PM, Andres Freund
>wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 2017-11-16 15:27:59 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> > Andres Freund writes:
>> > > On November 16, 2017 11:44:52 AM PST, Tom Lane
>
>> wrote:
>> > >> Yeah, there's no m
On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 12:37 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2017-11-16 15:27:59 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Andres Freund writes:
> > > On November 16, 2017 11:44:52 AM PST, Tom Lane
> wrote:
> > >> Yeah, there's no mechanism like that now, but there could be.
> >
> > > Right, but it doe
Hi,
On 2017-11-16 15:27:59 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund writes:
> > On November 16, 2017 11:44:52 AM PST, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Yeah, there's no mechanism like that now, but there could be.
>
> > Right, but it doesn't sound that hard to introduce. Basically there'd need
> > to be a Wi
Andres Freund writes:
> On November 16, 2017 11:44:52 AM PST, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Yeah, there's no mechanism like that now, but there could be.
> Right, but it doesn't sound that hard to introduce. Basically there'd need to
> be a WithParamValue node, that first evaluates parameters and then ex
On November 16, 2017 11:44:52 AM PST, Tom Lane wrote:
>Andres Freund writes:
>> Well, it's not a question of cost of the function now? Imagine
>> SELECT inlineable(something());
>> if you have 10 references for the parameter inside inlineable(). Then
>> currently something() would be evalua
Andres Freund writes:
> Well, it's not a question of cost of the function now? Imagine
> SELECT inlineable(something());
> if you have 10 references for the parameter inside inlineable(). Then
> currently something() would be evaluated 10 times. Which'd quite
> possibly be bad.
Right. I kind
Hi,
On 2017-11-16 09:37:29 -0800, Paul Ramsey wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 12:11 PM, Paul Ramsey
> wrote:
>
> > All,
> >
> > As we try and make PostGIS more "parallel sensitive" we have been added
> > costs to our functions, so that their relative CPU cost is more accurately
> > reflected in
On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 12:11 PM, Paul Ramsey
wrote:
> All,
>
> As we try and make PostGIS more "parallel sensitive" we have been added
> costs to our functions, so that their relative CPU cost is more accurately
> reflected in parallel plans.
>
> This has resulted in an odd side effect: some of o
13 matches
Mail list logo
