Re: [HACKERS] Mapping MERGE onto CTEs (Re: MERGE SQL Statement forPG11) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alvaro Herrera
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Mapping MERGE onto CTEs (Re: MERGE SQL Statement forPG11)
Date
Msg-id 20171101171403.mhl5z3uxfi6xa76t@alvherre.pgsql
Whole thread Raw
In response to [HACKERS] Mapping MERGE onto CTEs (Re: MERGE SQL Statement for PG11)  (Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Mapping MERGE onto CTEs (Re: MERGE SQL Statement for PG11)  (Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Nico Williams wrote:

> As an aside, I'd like to be able to control which CTEs are view-like and
> which are table-like.  In SQLite3, for example, they are all view-like,
> and the optimizer will act accordingly, whereas in PG they are all
> table-like, and thus optimizer barriers.

There was a short and easy to grasp (OK, maybe not) discussion on the
topic of CTEs acting differently.  I think the consensus is that for
CTEs that are read-only and do not use functions that aren't immutable,
they may be considered for inlining.
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/5351711493487900@web53g.yandex.ru

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Nico Williams
Date:
Subject: [HACKERS] Mapping MERGE onto CTEs (Re: MERGE SQL Statement for PG11)
Next
From: Simon Riggs
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] MERGE SQL Statement for PG11