| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Etsuro Fujita <fujita(dot)etsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Ildus Kurbangaliev <i(dot)kurbangaliev(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Bug in ExecModifyTable function and trigger issues for foreign tables |
| Date: | 2017-11-27 15:49:32 |
| Message-ID: | 18636.1511797772@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> I wonder if, years from now, it might look a bit odd that
> rewriteTargetListUD() is doing part of work of preptlist.c, is only
> called from there, and yet is located in the rewriter.
Yeah, I probably wouldn't have done it like this in a green field,
but maintaining traceability to the existing code is valuable IMO.
> A separate point -- it might be marginally more efficient to have the
> work of rewriteTargetListUD() done after expand_targetlist() to avoid
> the possible renumbering of the resjunk entries.
Hm. It wouldn't save a lot, but yeah, doing it in this order seems
a bit silly when you put it like that.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ildus Kurbangaliev | 2017-11-27 15:52:18 | Re: [HACKERS] Custom compression methods |
| Previous Message | Daniel Gustafsson | 2017-11-27 15:11:39 | Re: [HACKERS] Refactoring identifier checks to consistently use strcmp |