Em qua., 15 de set. de 2021 às 12:00, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> escreveu:
> Ranier Vilela <ranier...@gmail.com> writes: > > I would like to ask if this alternative fix (attached) would also solve > the > > problem or not. > > If I'm reading the patch correctly, that fixes it by failing to drop > unused subplans at all --- the second loop you have has no external > effect. > > We could, in fact, not bother with removing the no-longer-referenced > subplans, and it probably wouldn't be all that awful. But the intent > of the original patch was to save the executor startup time for such > subplans, so I wanted to preserve that goal if I could. The committed > patch seems small enough and cheap enough to be worthwhile. > Understood, thanks for replying. regards, Ranier Vilela
