From: | Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Deparsing rewritten query |
Date: | 2021-06-27 15:21:37 |
Message-ID: | 20210627152137.3rwfmfswwfrxmlsr@nol |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Jun 27, 2021 at 11:14:05AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>
> > Agreed. One the other hand having such a function in core may ensure that any
> > significant change in those area will keep an API to retrieve the final query
> > representation.
>
> My point is precisely that I'm unwilling to make such a promise.
>
> I do not buy that this capability is worth very much, given that
> we've gotten along fine without it for twenty-plus years. If you
> want to have it as an internal, might-change-at-any-time API,
> that seems all right.
I'm totally fine with a might-change-at-any-time API, but not with a
might-disappear-at-anytime API. If exposing get_query_def() can become
virtually useless in a few releases with no hope to get required in-core change
for retrieving the final query representation, I agree this we can stop the
discussion here.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2021-06-27 15:26:54 | Re: Composite types as parameters |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2021-06-27 15:14:05 | Re: Deparsing rewritten query |