-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Gaetano Mendola wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Gaetano Mendola <mendola@bigfoot.com> writes:
>>> [ 8.2 evaluates volatile functions in the targetlist of a view ]
>>> If I mark the function as STABLE or IMMUTABLE then even with version
>>> 8.2 the function is not evaluated. Is this the intended behavior?
>> Yes; people complained that we needed to be more careful about the
>> number of times volatile functions get evaluated.
>
> I suspect that functions are evaluated also for record discarded due to
> joins. Is that the case?
>
> Like:
>
> SELECT * FROM ta JOIN tb USING (id) where tb.foo = 4;
>
> If ta is a view with some calculated fields are the function on ta
> evaluated only for record matching the filters or in some case (
> like a full scan on ta ) also for the records discarded due to the join?
>
I did a check on a 8.2 and I can confirm my suspects:
kalman=# create table ta ( a integer, b integer );
CREATE TABLE
kalman=# create table tb ( b integer, c integer );
CREATE TABLE
kalman=#
kalman=# CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION sp_test ( INTEGER )
kalman-# RETURNS INTEGER AS'
kalman'# DECLARE
kalman'# a_id ALIAS FOR $1;
kalman'# BEGIN
kalman'# RAISE NOTICE ''here'';
kalman'#
kalman'# return 3;
kalman'# END;
kalman'# ' LANGUAGE 'plpgsql';
CREATE FUNCTION
kalman=#
kalman=# CREATE OR REPLACE VIEW v_ta AS
kalman-# SELECT
kalman-# sp_test(a) AS a,
kalman-# b AS b
kalman-# FROM
kalman-# ta c
kalman-# ;
CREATE VIEW
kalman=#
kalman=# insert into ta values (2,3);
INSERT 0 1
kalman=# insert into ta values (3,4);
INSERT 0 1
kalman=# insert into tb values (4,5);
INSERT 0 1
kalman=#
kalman=# select * from v_ta join tb using (b) where c = 5;
NOTICE: here
NOTICE: hereb | a | c
- ---+---+---4 | 3 | 5
(1 row)
Is really this what we want? I did a migration 8.0.x => 8.2.3 and I had on first hour of service up
lot of queries "blocked" due to this, consider in my case I have on v_ta milions of records and usually
that join extracts 1 row. Is there a way to set till I don't check all my huge schema to disable this
behaviour?
Regards
Gaetano Mendola
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFF8TAc7UpzwH2SGd4RAgajAKCvIxLH9JSBk4gxSbuaq4WE2y7v2wCfbnRa
jWDV3hlEq/Loye6G+E2S9Ew=
=LR5T
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
