| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Subject: | Re: Command Triggers |
| Date: | 2012-01-18 19:25:48 |
| Message-ID: | 201201182025.49696.andres@anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wednesday, January 18, 2012 08:17:36 PM Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Excerpts from Dimitri Fontaine's message of mié ene 18 16:03:29 -0300 2012:
> > At the moment the trigger functions are called from
> > standard_ProcessUtility() and are given the parse tree as handed over to
> > that function, before the parse analysis.
> >
> > We can easily enough copy the parse tree and do another round of parse
> > analysis on it only when some command triggers are going to get called.
> > Is the cost of doing so acceptable?
>
> Huh, isn't it simpler to just pass the triggers the parse tree *after*
> parse analysis? I don't understand what you're doing here.
Parse analysis is not exactly nicely separated for utility statements.
Andres
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2012-01-18 19:30:47 | Re: Setting -Werror in CFLAGS |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2012-01-18 19:21:45 | Re: return values of backend sub-main functions |