Re: final patch - plpgsql: for-in-array
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Cédric Villemain <cedric.villemain.debian@gmail.com>, Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>, Jaime Casanova <jaime@2ndquadrant.com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2010-11-24T15:33:02Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: > Right, that was my impression, too. But, I think this may be partly a > case of people talking past each other. My impression of this > conversation was a repetition of this sequence: > A: This syntax is bad. > B: But it's way faster! > ...which makes no sense. However, what I now think is going on here > is that there are really two separate things that are wished for here > - a more compact syntax, and a performance improvement. And taken > separately, I agree with both of those desires. PL/pgsql is an > incredibly clunky language syntactically, and it's also slow. A patch > that improves either one of those things has value, whether or not it > also does the other one. I understand the desire for nicer syntax, in the abstract. I'm just unimpressed by this particular change, mainly because I'm afraid that it will make syntax-error behaviors worse and foreclose future options for other changes to FOR. If it were necessary to change the syntax to get the performance benefit, I might think that on balance we should do so; but it isn't. regards, tom lane