| From: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Changed SRF in targetlist handling |
| Date: | 2016-05-23 20:33:41 |
| Message-ID: | CAKFQuwa9_UCyTrJ+znOdRy=HhUR2sBjZkQWrLC2GaLniKWuxDg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 4:24 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> writes:
>
> > > I'll also note that, unless I missed something, we also have to
> consider
> > > that the capability to pipeline results is still only available in the
> > > target list.
> >
> > Yes, we would definitely want to improve nodeFunctionscan.c to perform
> > better for ValuePerCall SRFs. But that has value independently of this.
>
> Ah, so that's what "pipeline results" mean! I hadn't gotten that. I
> agree; Abhijit had a patch or a plan for this, a long time ago ...
>
>
Is this sidebar strictly an implementation detail, not user visible?
David J.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2016-05-23 20:37:28 | Re: Calling json_* functions with JSONB data |
| Previous Message | David G. Johnston | 2016-05-23 20:32:07 | Re: Changed SRF in targetlist handling |