Re: Processing long AND/OR lists
| От | Christopher Browne |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Processing long AND/OR lists |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAFNqd5WrmUh_dPR_o69hnLj7zq+mXbCdhKBGuZHdbgMBqq=q8Q@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Processing long AND/OR lists (Gurjeet Singh <gurjeet@singh.im>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Processing long AND/OR lists
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 1:42 AM, Gurjeet Singh <gurjeet@singh.im> wrote:
--
When confronted by a difficult problem, solve it by reducing it to the
question, "How would the Lone Ranger handle this?"
Joking about "640K" aside, it doesn't seem reasonable to expect a truly enormous query as is generated by the broken forms of this logic to turn out happily. I'd rather fix Slony (as done in the above patch).
Yes, by all means, fix the application, but that doesn't preclude the argument that the database should be a bit more smarter and efficient, especially if it is easy to do.
Agreed, it seems like a fine idea to have the database support such queries, as this eases coping with applications that might be more difficult to get fixed. (I can't see too many users generating such enormous queries by hand! :-))
When confronted by a difficult problem, solve it by reducing it to the
question, "How would the Lone Ranger handle this?"
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: