| From: | YUriy Zhuravlev <u(dot)zhuravlev(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> | 
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org | 
| Subject: | Re: clearing opfuncid vs. parallel query | 
| Date: | 2015-10-23 09:31:10 | 
| Message-ID: | 3545716.sE8tFNsRk9@dinodell | 
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email | 
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers | 
On Thursday 22 October 2015 09:26:46 David Fetter wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 07:15:35PM +0300, YUriy Zhuravlev wrote:
> > Hello.
> > Currently using nodeToString and stringToNode you can not pass a
> > full plan. In this regard, what is the plan to fix it? Or in the
> > under task parallel query does not have such a problem?
> > 
> > > This turns out not to be straightforward to code, because we don't
> > > have a generic plan tree walker,
> > 
> > I have an inner development. I am using python analyzing header
> > files and generates a universal walker (parser, paths ,executer and
> > etc trees), as well as the serializer and deserializer to jsonb.
> > Maybe I should publish this code?
> 
> Please do.
Tom Lane and Robert Haas are very unhappy with a python. Is there any reason? 
Thanks!
-- 
YUriy Zhuravlev
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alexander Korotkov | 2015-10-23 09:41:50 | Re: clearing opfuncid vs. parallel query | 
| Previous Message | YUriy Zhuravlev | 2015-10-23 09:29:08 | Re: clearing opfuncid vs. parallel query |