Horton

Re: wCTE behaviour

Marko Tiikkaja <marko.tiikkaja@cs.helsinki.fi>

View thread
From: Marko Tiikkaja <marko.tiikkaja@cs.helsinki.fi>
To: David Fetter <david@fetter.org>
Cc: Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Yeb Havinga <yebhavinga@gmail.com>, Hitoshi Harada <umi.tanuki@gmail.com>
Date: 2010-12-08T11:23:59Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On 2010-12-08 10:19 AM +0200, David Fetter wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 05, 2010 at 01:33:39PM -0500, Greg Smith wrote:
>> So this patch was marked "Ready for Committer", but a) no committer
>> has picked it up yet and b) Marko has made changes here that nobody
>> else has tested out yet that I've seen on the last.  Accordingly,
>> that classification may have been optimistic.  It seems to me that
>> another testing run-through from someone like David might be
>> appropriate to build some confidence this latest patch should be a
>> commit candidate.  If there is a committer intending to work on this
>> as-is, they haven't identified themselves.
>
> I've tested this one and not managed to break it.  One thing it could
> use is support for EXPLAIN ANALYZE.

What's wrong with EXPLAIN ANALYZE?  Here's what I see:

=# explain analyze with t as (insert into foo values(0) returning *) 
select * from t;
                                             QUERY PLAN 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  CTE Scan on t  (cost=0.01..0.03 rows=1 width=4) (actual 
time=0.017..0.017 rows=1 loops=2)
    CTE t
      ->  Insert  (cost=0.00..0.01 rows=1 width=0) (actual 
time=0.029..0.030 rows=1 loops=1)
            ->  Result  (cost=0.00..0.01 rows=1 width=0) (actual 
time=0.002..0.002 rows=1 loops=1)
  Total runtime: 0.104 ms
(5 rows)


Regards,
Marko Tiikkaja