Hi, On 2021-06-16 21:39:49 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Although this adds some overhead in the form of copying of > utility node trees that won't actually mutate during execution, > I think that won't be too bad because those trees tend to be > small and hence cheap to copy. The statements that can have > a lot of substructure usually contain expression trees or the > like, which do have to be copied for safety. Moreover, we buy > back a lot of cost by removing pointless copying when we're > not executing on a cached plan.
Have you evaluated the cost in some form? I don't think it a relevant cost for most utility statements, but there's a few exceptions that *do* worry me. In particular, in some workloads transaction statements are very frequent. Greetings, Andres Freund
