Re: Why overhead of SPI is so large?

From: Konstantin Knizhnik <k(dot)knizhnik(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com, tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Why overhead of SPI is so large?
Date: 2019-11-21 09:31:23
Message-ID: [email protected]
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


> I've set the CF entry to "Waiting on Author" pending a new patch
> that does it like that.

With contain_mutable_functions the patch becomes trivial.

--
Konstantin Knizhnik
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company

Attachment Content-Type Size
plpgsql_exec_expr-3.patch text/x-patch 1.9 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2019-11-21 09:40:36 Re: fix "Success" error messages
Previous Message Jeevan Chalke 2019-11-21 09:21:01 Re: backup manifests