Re: [HACKERS] PoC plpgsql - possibility to force custom or genericplan

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Andres Freund
Тема Re: [HACKERS] PoC plpgsql - possibility to force custom or genericplan
Дата
Msg-id 20180301221052.3jo5uayej2eqqsue@alap3.anarazel.de
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [HACKERS] PoC plpgsql - possibility to force custom or generic plan  (Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: [HACKERS] PoC plpgsql - possibility to force custom or generic plan  (Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Дерево обсуждения 
On 2018-01-23 17:08:56 +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> 2018-01-22 23:15 GMT+01:00 Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>:
> > This really could use a new thread, imv.  This thread is a year old and
> > about a completely different feature than what you've implemented here.
> >
> 
> true, but now it is too late

At the very least the CF entry could be renamed moved out the procedual
language category?

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Peter Geoghegan
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: "failed to find parent tuple for heap-only tuple" error as anERRCODE_DATA_CORRUPTION ereport()
Следующее
От: Tomas Vondra
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] MERGE SQL Statement for PG11