From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Kouhei Kaigai <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [v9.5] Custom Plan API |
Date: | 2014-11-21 17:23:43 |
Message-ID: | 9660.1416590623@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:
> As I said, I wasn't sure we wanted to commit to the API enough to
> document it, and by the time you get done whacking the stuff above
> around, the documentation KaiGai wrote for it (which was also badly in
> need of editing by a native English speaker) would have been mostly
> obsolete anyway. But I'm willing to put some effort into it once you
> get done rearranging the furniture, if that's helpful.
I thought of another API change we should consider. It's weird that
CustomPathMethods includes CreateCustomScanPath, because that's not
a method you apply to a CustomPath, it's what creates them in the first
place. I'm inclined to think that we should get rid of that and
register_custom_path_provider() altogether and just provide a function
hook variable equivalent to create_customscan_paths, which providers can
link into in the usual way. The register_custom_path_provider mechanism
might have some use if we were also going to provide deregister-by-name
functionality, but as you pointed out upthread, that's not likely to ever
be worth doing.
The hook function might better be named something like
editorialize_on_relation_paths, since in principle it could screw around
with the Paths already made by the core code, not just add CustomPaths.
There's an analogy to get_relation_info_hook, which is meant to let
plugins editorialize on the relation's index list. So maybe
set_plain_rel_pathlist_hook?
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2014-11-21 17:32:35 | Re: psql \sf doesn't show it's SQL when ECHO_HIDDEN is on |
Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2014-11-21 17:22:38 | Re: psql \sf doesn't show it's SQL when ECHO_HIDDEN is on |