Re: [HACKERS] Early evaluation of constant expresions (with PATCH)

Bernard Frankpitt <frankpit@pop.dn.net> writes:
>> .... (Actually, now
>> that I look at it, it looks like the functions rather than the
>> operators are missing the necessary preinitialization.  Perhaps at
>> the place where you chose to put this in, setFcache has already
>> been done?)

> The functions work because the funcid field in the Func node is already
> filled in, and the EvalQual code uses this field to generate the
> Fcache.

Oh, OK.  Cool.  For some reason I was thinking that the planner
was supposed to generate the fcache entry somewhere along the line.

> All points well taken.  I don't have time to do this thoroughly right
> now, but I will get back to it.

OK, or I will work on it if I get to it before you do.  As Thomas
remarked, you've provided a great starting point --- thanks!

I know I already have one patch from you that I promised to integrate,
but I'm up to my ass in buffer refcount bugs :-(.  As soon as I can come
up for air, I will stick in this code, though I think I will call it
from somewhere near cnfify per prior discussion.

>> Bruce points out in another reply that the proiscachable field of
>> pg_proc is intended for exactly this purpose.  

> Perhaps adding another option to create function is in order here.

Actually, create function *has* an iscachable option which sets that
field.  According to glimpse, it's the only code in the system that
knows the field exists :-(
        regards, tom lane