Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 3:48 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> I think the problem is you're trying to put this into backend/parser
>> which is not really the right place for it.
> If this isn't parse analysis, then you and I have very different ideas
> of what parse analysis is.
Maybe so, but the parser is expected to put out a representation that
will still be valid when the command is executed some time later.
That is exactly why utility statements have the barely-more-than-source
parsetree representation they do: because we do not hold locks on the
objects from parsing to execution, we could not expect an OID-level
representation to remain good. This is a lot different from what we
do with DML statements, but there are good reasons for it.
I repeat my observation that this code doesn't belong in /parser.
The code you're replacing was not in /parser, and that was because
it didn't belong there, not because somebody didn't understand the
system structure.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
