Re: Allowing extensions to supply operator-/function-specific info

From: Paul Ramsey <pramsey(at)cleverelephant(dot)ca>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Allowing extensions to supply operator-/function-specific info
Date: 2019-02-27 23:11:02
Message-ID: 74C11775-67A7-48D2-B1E3-24C52A686F86@cleverelephant.ca
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

A few more questions…

The documentation says that a support function should have a signature "supportfn(internal) returns internal”, but doesn’t say which (if any) annotations should be provided. IMMUTABLE? PARALLEL SAFE? STRICT? None? All?

Variable SupportRequestCost is very exciting, but given that variable cost is usually driven by the complexity of arguments, what kind of argument is the SupportRequestCost call fed during the planning stage? Constant arguments are pretty straight forward, but what gets sent in when a column is one (or all) of the arguments?

Thanks,
P

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andy Fan 2019-02-27 23:35:53 Re: some hints to understand the plsql cursor.
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2019-02-27 23:10:10 Re: patch to allow disable of WAL recycling