| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Kohei KaiGai <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp>, PgHacker <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Subject: | Re: Custom Plan node |
| Date: | 2013-09-06 22:43:47 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoYZ5PQhOxk+bH35kxTNnF8Q88BYfWN4EBPpqyt1UyLNBw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 4:53 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Kohei KaiGai <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp> writes:
>> The attached patch adds a new plan node type; CustomPlan that enables
>> extensions to get control during query execution, via registered callbacks.
>
> TBH, I think this is really an exercise in building useless mechanism.
> I don't believe that any actually *interesting* new types of plan node can
> be inserted into a query plan without invasive changes to the planner, and
> so it's a bit pointless to set up hooks whereby you can avoid touching any
> source code in the executor.
I find this a somewhat depressing response. Didn't we discuss this
exact design at the developer meeting in Ottawa? I thought it sounded
reasonable to you then, or at least I don't remember you panning it.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2013-09-06 23:03:27 | Re: Custom Plan node |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2013-09-06 22:41:58 | Re: [RFC] Extend namespace of valid guc names |