Tom Lane wrote: <blockquote cite="mid:8368.1203893092@sss.pgh.pa.us" type="cite"><pre wrap="">"Jonah H. Harris" <a
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"href="mailto:jonah.harris@gmail.com"><jonah.harris@gmail.com></a> writes:
</pre><blockquotetype="cite"><pre wrap="">Not stupid, it doesn't work :) This was a limitation of the original
design based on (IIRC) executor-related issues. </pre></blockquote><pre wrap="">
There are definitional issues not only implementation ones; in
particular, in subquery-like cases it's entirely unclear how many times
the DML operation will or should get evaluated. </pre></blockquote><br /> Interesting. Would it be cheating to only
allowit in cases where the evaluation should definately be only once? For example, insert ... delete, create table ...
delete,or part of a join expression?<br /><br /> In any case - I don't have the know how to fix it, and it's certainly
moreof a "would be cute" than "I must have it." I'll settle with my table locks for now. It's no big deal for my
application.<br/><br /> I'm noticing a massive reduction in on disk storage required for my database that I believe is
primarilyattributable due to Tom's reduced overhead for short strings. Some of the tables I am importing have a 10 - 20
shortstring fields (many 0 length strings!). Unfortunately - I wasn't looking for this specifically, so I didn't keep
myold database instance around. But I'm thinking by memory that the biggest table is now 1/3 the number of relpages in
8.3as it was in 8.2. Good job all around hackers. Again - *NO* problems. It just works.<br /><br /> Cheers,<br />
mark<br/><br /><pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Mark Mielke <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:mark@mielke.cc"><mark@mielke.cc></a>
</pre>
