Re: Select For Update and Left Outer Join
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Select For Update and Left Outer Join |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 8C3F5632-64B0-457A-8BBD-DEB0F581216F@gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Select For Update and Left Outer Join ("Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Jul 11, 2011, at 11:55 AM, "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I find these responses to be a bit off point. > > The OP is basically looking for what Florian tried to implement. > This is perhaps a *bit* off point, but arguably not more than > pointing someone who is requesting planner hints in another > direction. And someone thought the issues were related here: > > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2010-12/msg01792.php > > ;-) Well, fair enough. I thought of the connection between this request and Florian's work, too. I would very much like to supportwhat he proposed, but it doesn't appear viable without a heapam rewrite, or maybe a lock manager rewrite. However,I think that's a somewhat separate question from whether we need to forbid SFU on the outer side of a join. Tom's question seems to me to be right on target: what semantics do our competitors assign to this construct? And do theybroadly agree with each other? >> Evidently our competition does not agree > > Neither on this nor on planner hints. ;-) Well, we are a pretty smart group of people. But I don't think we should completely ignore what other people are doing, onany topic. ...Robert
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: