Hi Tom: On Fri, Aug 4, 2023 at 3:13 AM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Andy Fan <zhihui.fan1...@gmail.com> writes: > >> If you use explicit cast, then the code should not be hard, in the > >> rewrite stage all information should be known. > > > Can you point to me where the code is for the XML stuff? > > I think Pavel means XMLTABLE, which IMO is an ugly monstrosity of > syntax --- but count on the SQL committee to do it that way :-(. > Thanks for this input! > > As far as the current discussion goes, I'm strongly against > introducing new functions or operators to do the same things that > we already have perfectly good syntax for. "There's more than one > way to do it" isn't necessarily a virtue, and for sure it isn't a > virtue if people have to rewrite their existing queries to make use > of your optimization. > I agree, this is always the best/only reason I'd like to accept. > > > I do like the idea of attaching a Simplify planner support function > to jsonb_numeric (and any other ones that seem worth optimizing) > I have a study planner support function today, that looks great and I don't think we need much work to do to get our goal, that's amzing. For all the people who are interested in this topic, I will post a planner support function soon, you can check that then. -- Best Regards Andy Fan
