Re: [HACKERS] Current sources?

> Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > > The second option (your earlier suggestion) seems to be necessary and sufficient. The junk filter (and
> > > jf_cleanTupType) will always exist, for SELECT statements, as long as the following is not a legal statement:
> > >
> > > SELECT FROM foo GROUP BY bar;
> > >
> > > Currently the parser will not accept it. Sufficient.
> > >
> > > The first option will set tupType, for non-SELECT statements, to something it otherwise may not have been.
> > > I would rather not risk effecting those calling routines which are not executing a SELECT command. At this
> > > time, I do not understand them enough, and I see no benefit. Necessary?
> >
> > OK, I will leave it alone. Is there a way to use junk filters only in
> > cases where we need them?
>
> I have not YET come up with a clean method for detection of the a resjunk flag being set, on some resdom in the
> tatget list, by a GROUP/ORDER BY. I will give it another look. It does seem a bit heavy handed to construct the
> filter unconditionally on all SELECTS.

David, attached is a patch to conditionally use the junk filter only
when their is a Resdom that has the resjunk field set. Please review it
and let me know if there are any problems with it.

I am committing the patch to the development tree.

--
Bruce Momjian | 830 Blythe Avenue
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
+ If your life is a hard drive, | (610) 353-9879(w)
+ Christ can be your backup. | (610) 853-3000(h)