Re: Changing SQL Inlining Behaviour (or...?) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andrew Gierth
Subject Re: Changing SQL Inlining Behaviour (or...?)
Date
Msg-id 871s586uri.fsf@news-spur.riddles.org.uk
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Changing SQL Inlining Behaviour (or...?)  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
>>>>> "Tom" == Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes:

 Tom> The other thing we need to consider is whether we need any
 Tom> documentation adjustments. I believe that right now, the rules for
 Tom> inlining SQL functions are not documented anywhere but the code,

That is correct, though we got so tired of explaining it on IRC that
there is a wiki page (though it hasn't been updated since 9.5, but I'm
pretty sure there aren't any significant changes needed):

https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Inlining_of_SQL_functions

-- 
Andrew (irc:RhodiumToad)


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Paul Martinez
Date:
Subject: [PROPOSAL] ON DELETE SET NULL () for Foreign Key Constraints
Next
From: Vik Fearing
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_stat_statements vs. SELECT FOR UPDATE