Tom Lane wrote: > A difficulty with either your patch or my idea is that they require adding > another field to ExplainState, which is an ABI break for any third-party > code that might be declaring variables of that struct type. That's fine > for HEAD but would be risky to back-patch. Any thoughts about whether we > can get away with that (ie, anybody have an idea if there are third-party > extensions that call explain.c)?
codesearch.debian.net shows a couple of hits for ExplainState in multicorn (an extension for FDW from Python data sources); I didn't look but it seems that the FDW API is using that struct. -- Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
