Re: query_planner() API change

From: Atri Sharma <atri(dot)jiit(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: query_planner() API change
Date: 2013-08-05 06:46:18
Message-ID: CAOeZVieabfN3nV9tckELkQQiLkzCuYGE7ax3BLR9dMz9sZe1pg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> While we could complicate query_planner()'s API even more to add some
> understanding of unnecessary resjunk items, I think this is probably
> the straw that breaks the camel's back for the current approach here.
> There is already a comment like this in query_planner():
>
> * This introduces some undesirable coupling between this code and
> * grouping_planner, but the alternatives seem even uglier; we couldn't
> * pass back completed paths without making these decisions here.

I agree with the idea,but am trying to understand why adding
understanding of resjunk columns is a bad idea. Just for understanding
purpose, could you please elaborate a bit on it?

Regards,

Atri

--
Regards,

Atri
l'apprenant

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ashutosh Bapat 2013-08-05 07:07:41 Re: query_planner() API change
Previous Message Tom Lane 2013-08-05 06:27:22 Re: Re: ALTER SYSTEM SET command to change postgresql.conf parameters (RE: Proposal for Allow postgresql.conf values to be changed via SQL [review])