Re: About adding a new filed to a struct in primnodes.h

From: Andy Fan <zhihui(dot)fan1213(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: About adding a new filed to a struct in primnodes.h
Date: 2020-11-25 02:31:00
Message-ID: CAKU4AWrcBSJbr0jKC_+kv3=yjyuR1qapLa2ZbFS4-hOQiNiEgA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 9:40 AM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> Andy Fan <zhihui(dot)fan1213(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > What I mean here is something like below.
>
> What exactly would be the value of that?
>
> There is work afoot, or at least on people's to-do lists, to mechanize
> creation of the outfuncs/readfuncs/etc code directly from the Node
> struct declarations. So special cases for particular fields are going
> to be looked on with great disfavor,

I agree with this, but I don't think there is no value in my suggestion
unless I missed something. Per my current understanding, the code
is too easy to make the datadir incompatible with binary, which requires
user to do some extra work and my suggestion is to avoid that and
it is the value. I think it is possible to make this strategy work with
the
"mechanize creation of the outfuncs/readfuncs/ect node", but there is
no point to try it unless we make agreement on if we should do that.

> even if you can make a case that
> there's some reason to do it. (Which I'm not seeing. We've certainly
> never had to do it in the past.)
>
> regards, tom lane
>

--
Best Regards
Andy Fan

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kyotaro Horiguchi 2020-11-25 02:39:39 Re: Strange behavior with polygon and NaN
Previous Message Tomas Vondra 2020-11-25 02:19:23 Re: [PoC] Non-volatile WAL buffer