Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2018 10:32:06 -0500
From: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
To: David Fetter <david@fetter.org>
Cc: Andrew Gierth <andrew@tao11.riddles.org.uk>,
	pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Early WIP/PoC for inlining CTEs
Message-ID: <20180725153205.GM5695@localhost>
References: <87sh48ffhb.fsf@news-spur.riddles.org.uk>
 <20180725054236.GB17411@fetter.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20180725054236.GB17411@fetter.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 07:42:37AM +0200, David Fetter wrote:
> Please find attached a version rebased atop 167075be3ab1547e18 with
> what I believe are appropriate changes to regression test output.  The
> other changes to the regression tests output are somewhat puzzling, as
> they change the actual results of queries.  I've also attached both
> the "leftover" diff and the files to which it should be applied.

I think the SQL programmer needs some control over whether a CTE is:

 - a materialized view -- and therefore a barrier
 - a view (which can then be inlined by the optimizer)

It is possible to add a keyword for this purpose in the WITH syntax:

    WITH   VIEW (...) AS a_view
         , MATERIALIZED VIEW (...) AS a_barrier
    ...;

This would be a lot like creating TEMP views, but without the catalog
overhead.

(I wonder how hard it would be to partiion the OID namespace into
temp/persistent ranges so that temp schema elements need not be written
into the catalog.)

Nico
--