From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Jean-Christophe Boggio <postgresql@thefreecat.org>
cc: pgsql-performance@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Performance degradation with CTEs, switching from PG 11 to PG 15
In-reply-to: <620b9acb-1989-43a3-839e-ff7286cebfe2@thefreecat.org>
References: <6245f4b6-e608-4d87-9cd8-d0a7a1b5f9d4@thefreecat.org>
 <211a58a6-5741-a0a2-db97-0e79f75d9d4f@a-kretschmer.de>
 <620b9acb-1989-43a3-839e-ff7286cebfe2@thefreecat.org>
Comments: In-reply-to Jean-Christophe Boggio <postgresql@thefreecat.org>
	message dated "Wed, 22 Nov 2023 16:58:01 +0100"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <1696362.1700669248.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2023 11:07:28 -0500
Message-ID: <1696363.1700669248@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/1696363.1700669248%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Jean-Christophe Boggio <postgresql@thefreecat.org> writes:
> I did upgrade :-) But we have many users for which we don't decide on 
> when they do upgrade so we have to keep compatibility with most versions 
> of PG and in that particular case (non-existence of the materialized 
> keyword for PG 11 and before) it is a real problem.

PG 11 is out of support as of earlier this month, so your users really
need to be prioritizing getting onto more modern versions.

			regards, tom lane