| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andrey Lepikhov <a(dot)lepikhov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Increase value of OUTER_VAR |
| Date: | 2021-03-06 08:43:45 |
| Message-ID: | 6a51a62e-c662-3ddd-ac06-e2f8dd989ad5@enterprisedb.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 04.03.21 20:01, Tom Lane wrote:
> Just as a proof of concept, I tried the attached, and it passes
> check-world. So if there's anyplace trying to stuff OUTER_VAR and
> friends into bitmapsets, it's pretty far off the beaten track.
>
> The main loose ends that'd have to be settled seem to be:
>
> (1) What data type do we want Var.varno to be declared as? In the
> previous thread, Robert opined that plain "int" isn't a good choice,
> but I'm not sure I agree. There's enough "int" for rangetable indexes
> all over the place that it'd be a fool's errand to try to make it
> uniformly something different.
int seems fine.
> (2) Does that datatype change need to propagate anywhere besides
> what I touched here? I did not make any effort to search for
> other places.
I think
Var.varnosyn
CurrentOfExpr.cvarno
should also have their type changed.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | 杨逸存 | 2021-03-06 09:01:55 | Inquiries about PostgreSQL's system catalog development——from a student developer of Nanjing University |
| Previous Message | osumi.takamichi@fujitsu.com | 2021-03-06 07:55:44 | RE: [HACKERS] logical decoding of two-phase transactions |