From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: post-freeze damage control |
Date: | 2024-04-09 21:05:02 |
Message-ID: | 3870977.1712696702@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Tue, Apr 9, 2024 at 11:37 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> What exactly is the point of having a NodeTag in the struct though?
>> If you don't need it to be a valid Node, that seems pointless and
>> confusing. We certainly have plenty of other lists that contain
>> plain structs without tags, so I don't buy that the List
>> infrastructure is making you do that.
> This code mixes Expr's and hash entries in the single list. The point
> of having a NodeTag in the struct is the ability to distinguish them
> later.
If you're doing that, it really really ought to be a proper Node.
If nothing else, that would aid debugging by allowing the list
to be pprint'ed.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andres Freund | 2024-04-09 21:05:21 | Re: Issue with the PRNG used by Postgres |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2024-04-09 21:03:01 | Re: removal of '{' from WORD_BREAKS |