| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com>, Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr> |
| Subject: | Re: Command Triggers, patch v11 |
| Date: | 2012-03-16 21:37:38 |
| Message-ID: | 201203162237.38813.andres@anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Friday, March 16, 2012 10:31:57 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> > One more thing I disliked quite a bit was the duplication of the EXECUTE
> > handling. Do you see a way to deduplicate that?
> Yeah, that's what's bugging me, too. I think a chunk of the problem is
> that you're insisting on having control come back to CreateTableAs()
> to perform the table creation. I'm thinking that if the table creation
> were to be moved into the tuple receiver's startup routine, we could
> avoid needing to get control back between ExecutorStartup and
> ExecutorRun, and then all that would be required would be to call
> ExecuteQuery with a different DestReceiver.
Hm. I seriously dislike doing that in the receiver. I can't really point out
why though. Unsurprisingly I like getting the control back to CreateTableAs...
Andres
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeff Davis | 2012-03-16 21:39:28 | Re: Incorrect assumptions with low LIMITs |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2012-03-16 21:31:57 | Re: Command Triggers, patch v11 |