On 2010-11-08 8:30 PM +0200, Tom Lane wrote:
Marko Tiikkaja<marko.tiikk...@cs.helsinki.fi> writes:
On 2010-11-08 7:26 PM +0200, Tom Lane wrote:
The alternative is to artificially serialize the DML CTEs, which
while it does have some advantages doesn't seem like a win overall.
We've discussed this before and the consensus was that as long as we
don't change the results, we can optimize the materialization away.
No, because the problem is mainly about what might happen if
user-defined functions choose to look at the target tables. We can't
really tell what triggers are going to do, to take one item that the
planner has no access to.
The relevant thread seems to be this one:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-11/msg00003.php
and I do agree with what you said there.
Regards,
Marko Tiikkaja
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
