| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Kouhei Kaigai <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>, Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: WIP: Upper planner pathification |
| Date: | 2016-03-22 12:28:32 |
| Message-ID: | CAB7nPqSYK4PBxhE3HdQqhmj5BZDu_izL5HG8U_JKM-ND2k8hXQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 7:55 AM, Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com> wrote:
> On 3/17/16 9:01 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>>
>> I think that
>> there are an awful lot of cases where extension authors haven't been
>> able to quite do what they want to do without core changes because
>> they couldn't get control in quite the right place; or they could do
>> it but they had to cut-and-paste a lot of code.
>
> FWIW, I've certainly run into this at least once, maybe twice. The case I
> can think of offhand is doing function resolution with variant. I don't
> remember the details anymore, but my recollection is that to get what I
> needed I would have needed to copy huge swaths of the rewrite code.
Amen, I have been doing that a couple of days ago with some elog stuff.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Fabrízio de Royes Mello | 2016-03-22 12:35:23 | Re: NOT EXIST for PREPARE |
| Previous Message | Ashutosh Bapat | 2016-03-22 12:10:23 | Re: Odd system-column handling in postgres_fdw join pushdown patch |