Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes: > On 2017-01-17 13:43:38 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: >> I'm not convinced that that optimization is worth preserving, but if we >> keep it then ProjectSet isn't le mot juste here, any more than you'd want >> to rename Result to Project without changing its existing >> functionality.
> Right. I'd removed that, and re-added it; primarily because the plans > looked more complex without it. After all, you'd thought it worth adding > that hack ;) I'm happy with removing it again too. Well, it seemed reasonable to do that as long as the only cost was ten or so lines in create_projection_plan. But if we're contorting not only the behavior but the very name of the SRF-evaluation plan node type, that's not negligible cost anymore. So now I'm inclined to take it out. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers