| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Duplicate node tag assignments |
| Date: | 2016-12-29 04:08:45 |
| Message-ID: | 20161229040845.da5v5tsmlcgap762@alvherre.pgsql |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 28, 2016 at 10:03 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> > Or we could just abandon the manually-assigned breaks in the list
> > altogether, and let NodeTags run from 1 to whatever. This would
> > slightly complicate debugging, in that the numeric values of node
> > tags would change more than they used to, but on the whole that does
> > not sound like a large problem.
>
> Yeah. In most cases, during debugging I use the tag for typecasting
> the node to see the values of the particular node type.
I do likewise. The actual numeric values don't matter to me one bit.
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2016-12-29 04:22:58 | Re: Reporting planning time with EXPLAIN |
| Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2016-12-29 03:57:10 | Re: Duplicate node tag assignments |