On Wed, Aug 20, 2025 at 10:29:03AM +0900, Richard Guo wrote: > On Wed, Aug 20, 2025 at 2:38 AM Nathan Bossart <nathandboss...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> There is still an open item for this one, but it's not clear whether we are >> planning to do anything about this for v18, especially since nobody has >> shown measurable performance impact. Does anyone want to argue for >> addressing this for v18, or shall we close the open item as "Won't Fix"? > > I don't think we're likely to do anything about this for v18. > Actually, I still doubt that the extra table_open call brings any > measurable performance impact, especially since the lock is already > held and the relation is likely already present in the relcache. > > Also, I still don't think moving the expansion of virtual generated > columns to the rewriter (as Tom proposed) is a better idea. It turned > out to have several problems that need to be fixed with the help of > PHVs, which is why we moved the expansion into the planner.
Okay. I have marked the v18 open item as "Won't Fix". -- nathan
