Re: clearing opfuncid vs. parallel query

From: YUriy Zhuravlev <u(dot)zhuravlev(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: clearing opfuncid vs. parallel query
Date: 2015-10-23 09:31:10
Message-ID: 3545716.sE8tFNsRk9@dinodell
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thursday 22 October 2015 09:26:46 David Fetter wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 07:15:35PM +0300, YUriy Zhuravlev wrote:
> > Hello.
> > Currently using nodeToString and stringToNode you can not pass a
> > full plan. In this regard, what is the plan to fix it? Or in the
> > under task parallel query does not have such a problem?
> >
> > > This turns out not to be straightforward to code, because we don't
> > > have a generic plan tree walker,
> >
> > I have an inner development. I am using python analyzing header
> > files and generates a universal walker (parser, paths ,executer and
> > etc trees), as well as the serializer and deserializer to jsonb.
> > Maybe I should publish this code?
>
> Please do.
Tom Lane and Robert Haas are very unhappy with a python. Is there any reason?

Thanks!

--
YUriy Zhuravlev
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alexander Korotkov 2015-10-23 09:41:50 Re: clearing opfuncid vs. parallel query
Previous Message YUriy Zhuravlev 2015-10-23 09:29:08 Re: clearing opfuncid vs. parallel query