logoalt Hacker News

exceptione • today at 1:10 PM • 1 reply • view on HN

  > You'd still return a multiplicative amount of rows, even if those rows contained only a reference
Sure, but a pointer is still a massive win over records, and I think a further cartesian product wire protocol extension would not be worth the hassle.

  >  `array_agg` in postgres avoids this
That one is tracked here: https://github.com/npgsql/efcore.pg/issues/2633

Replies

CodesInChaos • today at 2:19 PM

I don't think pointers (beyond a simple "same as in previous row" marker) will be a huge improvement, since you still get a multiplicative number of rows. And it comes with the cost of keeping all that data in memory. This approach also competes with using cheap compression (e.g. LZ4).

Some kind of "product" operator on the other hand reduces the cost to additive (just like `array_agg`).

> That one is tracked here: https://github.com/npgsql/efcore.pg/issues/2633

That issue is only about supporting `array_agg` as a function on tuples, not as an implementation strategy for `Include`s of collections.