Is there a TODO here?
Maybe!? It's one of these premature things noone can tell by now. So the TODO would be "investigation" for now.
Jan
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tom Lane wrote:Jan Wieck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm thinking instead of a way to "cache" entire executors for this. Each > SPI plan used during a transaction would need it's own executor, and I > don't know offhand what type and how much resources an executor requires > (I think it's only some memory that get's initialized and the VFD's > opened).
Hmm. This is probably more feasible now than it would have been a year ago, because I did some cleanup work to ensure that executor state is localized into a specific memory context. I'm not certain about the amount of overhead either, but it's surely worth a try.
regards, tom lane
-- #======================================================================# # It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. # # Let's break this rule - forgive me. # #================================================== [EMAIL PROTECTED] #
---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
