On 2017-03-09 13:34:22 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 6:54 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> > Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> >> Wonder if we there's an argument to be made for implementing this
> >> roughly similarly to split_pathtarget_at_srf - instead of injecting a
> >> ProjectSet node we'd add a FunctionScan node below a Result node.
> >
> > Yeah, possibly. That would have the advantage of avoiding an ExecProject
> > step when the SRFs aren't buried, which would certainly be the expected
> > case.
> >
> > If you don't want to make ExecInitExpr responsible, then the planner would
> > have to do something like split_pathtarget_at_srf anyway to decompose the
> > expressions, no matter which executor representation we use.
>
> Did we do anything about this? Are we going to?
Working on a patch.
- Andres
