Re: a proposal for an extendable deparser

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Dave Gudeman <dave(dot)gudeman(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Postgres <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: a proposal for an extendable deparser
Date: 2009-02-26 19:54:32
Message-ID: 2309.1235678072@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Dave Gudeman <dave(dot)gudeman(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> I would replace this with a table-driven deparser:
> deparse_table[nodeTag(node)](node, context);

I don't actually see what this is going to buy for you. You didn't
say exactly why ruleutils doesn't work for you, but reading between
the lines suggests that you want to add new node types. There are
a *ton* of places that need to change for that, typically, and this
isn't going to fix it.

I've occasionally speculated about the possible value of switching
over to method-table-based node types (or maybe just biting the bullet
and going to C++) but it never really looked like it would be worth
the trouble.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Heikki Linnakangas 2009-02-26 19:59:05 Re: Hot standby, recovery infra
Previous Message Simon Riggs 2009-02-26 19:49:16 Re: Hot standby, recovery infra