Hi,
Included are the latest WITH RECURSIVE patches against CVS HEAD.
The main differences from previous patches include:
- Allow multiple query names (mutual recursion is not still allowed)
These are some examples from the regression test:
WITH RECURSIVE
x(id) AS (SELECT * FROM y UNION AL
Chris,
Thanks for all of those changes... added as suggested (in next version)
On Wed, 2008-07-30 at 14:58 -0400, chris wrote:
> It's not clear to me that the plugin is actually working.
>
> When I run EXPLAIN against tables in "tomtestdb", I get results
> consistent with an unanalyzed table.
chris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Do we need to wait until a fully-parallelizing pg_restore is
> implemented before adding this functionality to pg_dump?
They're independent problems ... and I would venture that parallel
dump is harder.
> Further, it's actually not obvious that we *necessarily*
Simon Riggs wrote:
Well, this is a strange conclusion, leaving me slightly bemused.
The discussion between Andrew and I at PGcon concluded that we would
* document which other tools to use
* remove the delay
Now we have rejected the patch which does that, but then re-requested
the exact same
On Thu, 2008-07-31 at 12:32 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Heikki Linnakangas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Martin Zaun wrote:
> >> With these avenues to be explored, can the pg_standby patch on the
> >> CommitFest wiki be moved to the "Returned with Feedback" section?
>
> > Yes, I think we can con
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tom Lane) writes:
> Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I want to dump tables separately for performance reasons. There are
>> documented tests showing 100% gains using this method. There is no gain
>> adding this to pg_restore. There is a gain to be had - parallelising
>>
On Sat, 2008-08-02 at 00:24 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I think it makes sense to commit this patch now, per previous
> > discussions on which we have agreed to make incremental changes.
>
> Yeah, but at the same time there is merit in the argument that
