Re: clearing opfuncid vs. parallel query

From: David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>
To: YUriy Zhuravlev <u(dot)zhuravlev(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: clearing opfuncid vs. parallel query
Date: 2015-10-22 16:26:46
Message-ID: 20151022162646.GA22539@fetter.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 07:15:35PM +0300, YUriy Zhuravlev wrote:
> Hello.
> Currently using nodeToString and stringToNode you can not pass a
> full plan. In this regard, what is the plan to fix it? Or in the
> under task parallel query does not have such a problem?
>
> > This turns out not to be straightforward to code, because we don't
> > have a generic plan tree walker,
>
> I have an inner development. I am using python analyzing header
> files and generates a universal walker (parser, paths ,executer and
> etc trees), as well as the serializer and deserializer to jsonb.
> Maybe I should publish this code?

Please do.

Cheers,
David.
--
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david(dot)fetter(at)gmail(dot)com

Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2015-10-22 16:34:55 Re: Re: [BUGS] BUG #13694: Row Level Security by-passed with CREATEUSER permission
Previous Message YUriy Zhuravlev 2015-10-22 16:15:35 Re: clearing opfuncid vs. parallel query