| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | ITAGAKI Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCHES] WIP: executor_hook for pg_stat_statements |
| Date: | 2008-07-07 14:51:03 |
| Message-ID: | 10029.1215442263@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On Mon, 2008-07-07 at 11:03 +0900, ITAGAKI Takahiro wrote:
>> One issue is "tag" field. The type is now uint32. It's enough in my plugin,
>> but if some people need to add more complex structures in PlannedStmt,
>> Node type would be better rather than uint32. Which is better?
> I was imagining that tag was just an index to another data structure,
> but probably better if its a pointer.
I don't want the tag there at all, much less converted to a pointer.
What would the semantics be of copying the node, and why?
Please justify why you must have this and can't do what you want some
other way.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bernd Helmle | 2008-07-07 14:53:26 | Re: Schema-qualified statements in pg_dump output |
| Previous Message | Zdenek Kotala | 2008-07-07 14:41:59 | Re: PATCH: CITEXT 2.0 v2 |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2008-07-07 15:00:49 | Re: [HACKERS] SSL configure patch |
| Previous Message | David Fetter | 2008-07-07 14:33:42 | Re: [PATCHES] WITH RECURSIVE updated to CVS TIP |