Re: domain cast in parameterized vs. non-parameterized query - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: domain cast in parameterized vs. non-parameterized query
Date
Msg-id 2932.1513809678@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: domain cast in parameterized vs. non-parameterized query  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: domain cast in parameterized vs. non-parameterized query  (Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
I wrote:
> You might consider whether you can write 'spa-000'::uid explicitly in your
> query; that results in immediate application of the domain coercion, so
> that the planner no longer sees that as a run-time operation it has to
> avoid.

Hm, scratch that --- experimentation shows that the parser still produces
a CoerceToDomain node in that case, not a literal of the domain type.

regression=# create domain foo as text;
CREATE DOMAIN
regression=# explain verbose select 'x'::foo;               
                QUERY PLAN                 
-------------------------------------------
 Result  (cost=0.00..0.01 rows=1 width=32)
   Output: ('x'::text)::foo
(2 rows)

You could force the issue with an immutable function:

regression=# create function forcefoo(text) returns foo as
regression-# 'begin return $1::foo; end' language plpgsql immutable;
CREATE FUNCTION
regression=# explain verbose select forcefoo('x');
                QUERY PLAN                 
-------------------------------------------
 Result  (cost=0.00..0.01 rows=1 width=32)
   Output: 'x'::foo
(2 rows)

Marking this function as immutable is sort of a lie, because it
is effectively telling the planner that you don't expect any
failure from pre-evaluation of the function.  But it'd get the
job done, and in most situations there's no practical difference
because any failure would have happened anyway at runtime.

            regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: Tracking of page changes for backup purposes. PTRACK [POC]
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Letting plpgsql in on the fun with the new expression eval stuff