Hannu Krosing wrote:
A question to all pg hackers
Is anybody working on adding pipelining to set returning functions.
How much effort would it take ?
Where should I start digging ?
i asked myself basically the same question some time ago.
pipelining seems fairly impossible unless we ban j
On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 01:00:04PM +0300, Hannu Krosing wrote:
> > i asked myself basically the same question some time ago.
> > pipelining seems fairly impossible unless we ban joins on those
> > "plugins" completely.
>
> Not really, just they have to be "materialized" before joins, or
> streami
On Fri, 2008-04-11 at 10:57 +0200, Hans-Juergen Schoenig wrote:
> Hannu Krosing wrote:
> > A question to all pg hackers
> >
> > Is anybody working on adding pipelining to set returning functions.
> >
> > How much effort would it take ?
> >
> > Where should I start digging ?
> >
>
> i asked mys
Hannu Krosing wrote:
A question to all pg hackers
Is anybody working on adding pipelining to set returning functions.
Not as far as I know.
How much effort would it take ?
Where should I start digging ?
I don't remember all the details, but I think the original SRF patch
that I did was p
On Sun, Apr 06, 2008 at 10:01:20AM +0300, Hannu Krosing wrote:
> A question to all pg hackers
>
> Is anybody working on adding pipelining to set returning functions.
>
> How much effort would it take ?
>
> Where should I start digging ?
>
> BACKGROUND:
>
> AFAICS , currently set returning func
A question to all pg hackers
Is anybody working on adding pipelining to set returning functions.
How much effort would it take ?
Where should I start digging ?
BACKGROUND:
AFAICS , currently set returning functions materialise their results
before returning, as seen by this simple test:
hannu
