Re: auditing in postgresql
От | Jeff Davis |
---|---|
Тема | Re: auditing in postgresql |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1188594682.6199.85.camel@dogma.ljc.laika.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: auditing in postgresql ("Merlin Moncure" <mmoncure@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-general |
On Fri, 2007-08-31 at 16:42 -0400, Merlin Moncure wrote: > On 8/31/07, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > "Merlin Moncure" <mmoncure@gmail.com> writes: > > > At present, immutable functions are only treated as constants during a > > > query, which is what we want (no problems with prepare). > > > > Uh, no, they'd be folded to constants at plan time, which is exactly > > what Jeff doesn't want AFAICS. > > yikes! I did test this before I posted that, but I oversimplified it: > I didn't move the func() to the where clause...do the subselect > version defined as volatile seems the way to go. unfortunately this > means you pay a small extra price for large result sets. > That sounds like a good solution to me. It looks like the planner is able to optimize the queries, and the audit function is only called once. It sounds like I may need to beware of future changes, however. What is the small extra price for large tables though? Thanks for the help! Regards, Jeff Davis
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: