Re: [HACKERS] PoC plpgsql - possibility to force custom or generic plan - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: [HACKERS] PoC plpgsql - possibility to force custom or generic plan
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoZsDeqtQRnD9OpFu2wN7hWOBq9grEDMES1XaLvytnYRkg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] PoC plpgsql - possibility to force custom or generic plan  (Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] PoC plpgsql - possibility to force custom or generic plan
Re: [HACKERS] PoC plpgsql - possibility to force custom or generic plan
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 12:45 PM, Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> wrote:
>> You can already set a GUC with function scope.  I'm not getting your
>> point.
>
> yes, it is true. But implementation of #option is limited to PLpgSQL - so
> there is not any too much questions - GUC is global - there is lot of
> points:
>
> * what is correct impact on PREPARE
> * what is correct impact on EXECUTE
> * what should be done if this GUC is changed ..

For better or for worse, as a project we've settled on GUCs as a way
to control behavior.  I think it makes more sense to try to apply that
option to new behaviors we want to control than to invent some new
system.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] UPDATE of partition key
Next
From: Dipesh Dangol
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] pgjdbc logical replication client throwing exception