Re: Early WIP/PoC for inlining CTEs
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Andreas Karlsson <andreas@proxel.se>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>,
Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com>, Andrew Gierth <andrew@tao11.riddles.org.uk>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, David Fetter <david@fetter.org>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2019-01-18T20:34:46Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Commits
Same data as JSON:
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Prevent inlining of multiply-referenced CTEs with outer recursive refs.
- 9476131278c7 12.0 landed
-
Allow user control of CTE materialization, and change the default behavior.
- 608b167f9f9c 12.0 landed
-
Split QTW_EXAMINE_RTES flag into QTW_EXAMINE_RTES_BEFORE/_AFTER.
- 18c0da88a5d9 12.0 landed
-
document when PREPARE uses generic plans
- fab9d1da4a21 9.6.0 cited
On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 10:48 AM Andreas Karlsson <andreas@proxel.se> wrote: > On 1/11/19 8:10 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > > WITH cte_name [[NOT] MATERIALIZED] AS (query) main_query... > > Hm, when would one want "NOT MATERIALIZED"? I am not sure I see the > usefulness of forcing inlining other than if we by default do not inline > when a CTE is referenced multiple times. When the planner materializes it, but the performance of the resulting plan therefore sucks, I suppose. I don't feel super-strongly about this, and Tom is right that there may be cases where materialization is just not practical due to implementation restrictions. But it's not crazy to imagine that inlining a multiply-referenced CTE might create opportunities for optimization at each of those places, perhaps not the same ones in each case, whereas materializing it results in doing extra work. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company