On 3/22/16 7:28 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 7:55 AM, Jim Nasby <jim.na...@bluetreble.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.
Any ideas on ways to address this? Adding more hooks in random places
every time we stumble across something doesn't seem like a good method.
One thing I've wondered about is making it easier to find specific
constructs in a parsed query so that you can make specific
modifications. I recall looking at that once and finding a roadblock
(maybe a bunch of functions were static?)
--
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX
Experts in Analytics, Data Architecture and PostgreSQL
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
