Re: Early WIP/PoC for inlining CTEs
Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.com>
From: Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.com>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>,
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Andrew Gierth <andrew@tao11.riddles.org.uk>,
Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Andreas Karlsson <andreas@proxel.se>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>,
Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com>, David Fetter <david@fetter.org>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2019-02-14T19:22:04Z
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, Feb 14, 2019 at 10:02 AM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > On 2019-Feb-14, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > > On 14/02/2019 16:11, Tom Lane wrote: > > > ... so, have we beaten this topic to death yet? Can we make a decision? > > > > > > Personally, I'd be happy with either of the last two patch versions > > > I posted (that is, either AS [[NOT] MATERIALIZED] or > > > AS [MATERIALIZE [ON|OFF]] syntax). But we gotta pick something. > > > > If we're not really planning to add any more options, I'd register a > > light vote for MATERIALIZED. It reads easier, seems more grammatically > > correct, and uses an existing word. > > +1 for MATERIALIZED, as I proposed in > https://postgr.es/m/20170503173305.fetj4tz7kd56tjlr@alvherre.pgsql Seconded! merlin