From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Deparsing rewritten query
Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2021 11:14:05 -0400
Message-ID: <8085.1624806845@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210627150343.zslwnw7g564f2zz4@nol>
References: <20210627041138.zklczwmu3ms4ufnk@nol>
<3176554.1624804492@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<20210627150343.zslwnw7g564f2zz4@nol>
Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com> writes:
> On Sun, Jun 27, 2021 at 10:34:52AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> It's not very hard to imagine someday moving view
>> expansion into the planner on efficiency grounds, leaving the rewriter
>> handling only the rare uses of INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE rules.
> Agreed. One the other hand having such a function in core may ensure that any
> significant change in those area will keep an API to retrieve the final query
> representation.
My point is precisely that I'm unwilling to make such a promise.
I do not buy that this capability is worth very much, given that
we've gotten along fine without it for twenty-plus years. If you
want to have it as an internal, might-change-at-any-time API,
that seems all right. If you're trying to lock it down as something
that will be there forevermore, you're likely to end up with nothing.
regards, tom lane
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, rjuju123@gmail.com, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Deparsing rewritten query
In-Reply-To: <8085.1624806845@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox