Re: [HACKERS] Delaying insertion of default values

> More generally, I wonder whether it is such a good idea for rules to be
> stored as parsetrees. For example, I can't drop and recreate a table
> mentioned in a rule attached to a different table, because the compiled
> rule includes the OIDs of the tables it references. So the compiled
> rule will start failing if I do that. (Right now, this causes a core
> dump :-( ... apparently someone is assuming that the OID in an RTE will
> never be bad ...)
>
> With rules stored as parsetrees, we need to be very careful about how
> much semantic knowledge gets factored into the parsetree before it is
> frozen as a rule. (This is another reason for pushing "optimization"
> transformations out of the parser and into modules downstream of the
> rule rewriter, BTW.)
>
> Comments? Storing rules as plain text would be too slow, perhaps,
> but would it help any to store rules as "raw" parsetrees that haven't
> yet gone through analyze.c?

All this sounds good, though we have so many TODO items, it seems a
little of a reach to be going after this. Seems like a good thing to do
as you add that extra phase of query processing.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026