From: | Tatsuro Yamada <yamada(dot)tatsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: add queryEnv to ExplainOneQuery_hook |
Date: | 2018-01-12 01:43:40 |
Message-ID: | 9612a8bd-3adc-51d3-cb35-7df909a05fc3@lab.ntt.co.jp |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2018/01/11 21:46, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> I'm surprised we haven't heard any complaints sooner if there are
>> advisors using that hook[1] and expecting to be able to forward to
>> ExplainOnePlan(), but I suppose it would nearly always works to call
>> ExplainOnePlan() with NULL as queryEnv. It'd currently only be
>> non-NULL for trigger functions running SQL to access transition
>> tables, which is a bit obscure: you'd need to run EXPLAIN inside a
>> suitable trigger function (though in future there might be more ways
>> to create named tuplestore relations).
>
> It seems to me that QueryEnv should be pushed to the hook, but only on
> HEAD. You surely don't want to break people's extensions after a minor
> upgrade.
Thanks guys! :)
I also surprised that there is no complaint from extension creators.
I suppose that if possible, it would be better to create a unit test
for the hook function to avoid the same bug because there is no contrib
module using ExplainOneQuery_hook in contrib directory.
(It might unnecessary thing, maybe.)
Regards,
Tatsuro Yamada
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tatsuro Yamada | 2018-01-12 01:45:48 | Re: add queryEnv to ExplainOneQuery_hook |
Previous Message | Thomas Munro | 2018-01-12 01:41:06 | Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 |