From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: refactoring comment.c |
Date: | 2010-08-17 02:40:39 |
Message-ID: | 28438.1282012839@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 3:48 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)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
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2010-08-17 02:48:25 | Re: JSON Patch for PostgreSQL - BSON Support? |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2010-08-17 02:37:03 | Re: shared_preload_libraries is ignored in single user mode |