Re: Proposal to use JSON for Postgres Parser format

From: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Michel Pelletier <pelletier(dot)michel(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Proposal to use JSON for Postgres Parser format
Date: 2023-10-09 23:11:36
Message-ID: CA+hUKG+6_DkxZMo1ykRuYMk=r3iaaMy1szg46duJyhnNfu-OUA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Sep 20, 2022 at 4:16 PM Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> To explain my earlier guess: reader code for #S(STRUCTNAME ...) can
> bee seen here, though it's being lexed as "PLAN_SYM" so perhaps the
> author of that C already didn't know that was a general syntax for
> Lisp structs. (Example: at a Lisp prompt, if you write (defstruct foo
> x y z) then (make-foo :x 1 :y 2 :z 3), the resulting object will be
> printed as #S(FOO :x 1 :y 2 :z 3), so I'm guessing that the POSTGRES
> Lisp code, which sadly (for me) was ripped out before even that repo
> IIUC, must have used defstruct-based plans.)

That defstruct guess is confirmed by page 36 and nearby of
https://dsf.berkeley.edu/papers/UCB-MS-zfong.pdf.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2023-10-09 23:20:34 Re: New WAL record to detect the checkpoint redo location
Previous Message Andres Freund 2023-10-09 23:08:05 Lowering the default wal_blocksize to 4K