On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 10:55 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <rhaas(at)postgresql(dot)org> writes:
>> Add notion of a "transform function" that can simplify function calls.
> Why exactly was this thought to be a good idea:
>> * A NULL original expression disables use of transform functions while
>> * retaining all other behaviors.
> AFAICT that buys nothing except to greatly complicate the API
> specification for simplify_function, something that is now proving
> problematic for Marti's requested refactoring . If it's
> inappropriate for a transform function to modify a CoerceViaIO call,
> surely the transform function can be expected to know that.
I assumed that we were merely trying to avoid forcing the caller to
provide the expression tree if they didn't have it handy, and that the
comment was merely making allowance for the fact that someone might
want to do such a thing.
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Dimitri Fontaine||Date: 2012-03-23 15:26:47|
|Subject: Re: Finer Extension dependencies|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2012-03-23 15:20:07|
|Subject: Re: Uppercase tab completion keywords in psql? |
pgsql-committers by date
|Next:||From: Noah Misch||Date: 2012-03-23 15:31:47|
|Subject: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add notion of a "transform function" thatcan simplify function|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2012-03-23 14:55:52|
|Subject: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add notion of a "transform function" that can simplify function |