On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 4:56 PM, Thomas Munro
wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 4:22 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> I'm just trying to understand your comments so that I can have an
>> intelligent opinion about what we should do from here. Given
On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 4:22 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> I'm just trying to understand your comments so that I can have an
> intelligent opinion about what we should do from here. Given that the
> replan wouldn't happen anyway, there seems to be no reason to tinker
> with the
On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 12:04 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
>> On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 11:53 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> But it needs to be changeable, unless you like the proposition that we
>>> can never replan a query
Robert Haas writes:
> On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 11:53 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> But it needs to be changeable, unless you like the proposition that we
>> can never replan a query inside a trigger on the basis of new information
>> about how big the
On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 11:53 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> How does it break those properties? I don't think enrtuples is being
>> modified by planning or execution as things stand.
>
> But it needs to be changeable, unless you like the proposition that we
> can never replan a
Robert Haas writes:
> On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 10:05 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Well, the fundamental problem is that the RTE is a lousy place to keep
>> rowcount estimates. That breaks assorted desirable properties like
>> querytrees being readonly to
On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 10:05 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
>> Perhaps this is a silly question, but I don't particularly see what's
>> wrong with:
>
>> 3. Do nothing.
>
> Well, the fundamental problem is that the RTE is a lousy place to
Robert Haas writes:
> Perhaps this is a silly question, but I don't particularly see what's
> wrong with:
> 3. Do nothing.
Well, the fundamental problem is that the RTE is a lousy place to keep
rowcount estimates. That breaks assorted desirable properties like
querytrees
On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 12:04 AM, Thomas Munro
wrote:
> Here are a couple of ways forward that I can see:
>
> 1. Figure out how to get the QueryEnvironment through more of these
> stack frames (possibly inside other objects), so that
>
On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 6:40 PM, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 04:04:23PM +1200, Thomas Munro wrote:
>> On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 11:11 PM, Thomas Munro
>> wrote:
>> > On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 6:25 PM, Noah Misch
On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 04:04:23PM +1200, Thomas Munro wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 11:11 PM, Thomas Munro
> wrote:
> > On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 6:25 PM, Noah Misch wrote:
> >> This fourth point is not necessarily a defect: I wonder if
On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 11:11 PM, Thomas Munro
wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 6:25 PM, Noah Misch wrote:
>> This fourth point is not necessarily a defect: I wonder if RangeTblEntry is
>> the right place for enrtuples. It's a concept regularly
On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 6:25 PM, Noah Misch wrote:
> While completing my annual src/backend/nodes/*funcs.c audit, I noticed defects
> in commit 18ce3a4 changes to RangeTblEntry:
>
> 1. Field relid is under a comment saying it is valid for RTE_RELATION only.
The comment is out
While completing my annual src/backend/nodes/*funcs.c audit, I noticed defects
in commit 18ce3a4 changes to RangeTblEntry:
1. Field relid is under a comment saying it is valid for RTE_RELATION only.
Fields coltypes, coltypmods and colcollations are under a comment saying
they are valid for
14 matches
Mail list logo