Re: [HACKERS] CTE inlining - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andres Freund
Subject Re: [HACKERS] CTE inlining
Date
Msg-id 20170430074633.k2w5pvtze7ra2kto@alap3.anarazel.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] CTE inlining  (Craig Ringer <craig.ringer@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] CTE inlining  (Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Hi,

On 2017-04-30 13:58:14 +0800, Craig Ringer wrote:
> We have OFFSET 0 for anyone really depending on it, and at least when you
> read that you know to go "wtf" and look at the manual, wheras the CTE fence
> behaviour is invisible and silent.

I don't think that's a good idea.  What if you need to prevent inlining
of something that actually needs an offset? What if the behaviour of
offset is ever supposed to change?  Relying more on that seems to just
be repeating the mistake around CTEs.


> Like the work Andes has been doing on our bizarre handing of SRFs in the
> SELECT target list I really think it's just something that needs to be
> done.

With help from Tom, luckily...

Greetings,

Andres Freund



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Craig Ringer
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] CTE inlining
Next
From: Andrew Borodin
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] On How To Shorten the Steep Learning Curve Towards PG Hacking...