| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Sami Imseih <samimseih(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Greg Sabino Mullane <htamfids(at)gmail(dot)com>, Lukas Fittl <lukas(at)fittl(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Marko M <marko(at)pganalyze(dot)com>, Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Optionally record Plan IDs to track plan changes for a query |
| Date: | 2025-03-18 07:31:06 |
| Message-ID: | Z9khOo14yzZHCnmn@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 10:44:33AM -0600, Sami Imseih wrote:
> The reason for the change is because "query jumble" will no longer
> make sense if the jumble code can now be used for other types of
> trees, such as Plan.
>
> I do agree that this needs a single-threaded discussion to achieve a
> consensus.
FWIW, I was playing with a sub-project where I was jumbling a portion
of nodes other than Query, and it is annoying to not have a direct
access to jumbleNode(). So, how about doing the refactoring proposed
in v5-0002 with an initialization routine and JumbleNode() as the
entry point for the jumbling, but not rename the existing files
queryjumblefuncs.c and queryjumble.h? That seems doable for this
release, at least.
I don't think that we should expose AppendJumble(), either.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu) | 2025-03-18 07:32:49 | RE: pg_recvlogical requires -d but not described on the documentation |
| Previous Message | Thomas Munro | 2025-03-18 07:11:41 | Re: Some read stream improvements |