Re: Changing SQL Inlining Behaviour (or...?) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Changing SQL Inlining Behaviour (or...?)
Date
Msg-id 15978.1548029291@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Changing SQL Inlining Behaviour (or...?)  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Changing SQL Inlining Behaviour (or...?)  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
I wrote:
> I'll try to sketch up a more concrete plan soon.

I've posted some preliminary design ideas at

https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/15193.1548028093@sss.pgh.pa.us
and
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/15289.1548028233@sss.pgh.pa.us

While there's a nontrivial amount of work needed to make that happen,
I think it's doable, and it would lead to a significantly better
solution than proceeding along the inlining path could do.  My
current feeling, therefore, is that we should reject this patch
(or at least stick it in the deep freeze) and go work on that plan.

            regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Allowing extensions to find out the OIDs of their member objects
Next
From: "Kato, Sho"
Date:
Subject: RE: Delay locking partitions during INSERT and UPDATE