Re: Early WIP/PoC for inlining CTEs - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Early WIP/PoC for inlining CTEs
Date
Msg-id 5556.1549208397@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Early WIP/PoC for inlining CTEs  (Vik Fearing <vik.fearing@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Vik Fearing <vik.fearing@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> On 28/01/2019 23:05, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
>>> Or put it at the end?
>>> WITH ctename AS ( query ) MATERIALIZED

>> Yeah, I thought about that too, but it doesn't seem like an improvement.
>> If the query is very long (which isn't unlikely) I think people would
>> prefer to see the option(s) up front.

> On the other hand, the end is where the other options go (that we
> haven't implemented yet).  See <search or cycle clause>.

Yeah, I noticed that too while working on the latest patch revision.
ISTM that's actually an argument for *not* putting PG-specific
syntax there.  We'd increase the risk of conflicting with future spec
additions, assuming that they continue to add stuff at the end rather
than just after AS.

            regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Synchronize with imath upstream
Next
From: David Fetter
Date:
Subject: Re: Synchronize with imath upstream