Re: [PATCHES] WIP: executor_hook for pg_stat_statements

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: [PATCHES] WIP: executor_hook for pg_stat_statements
Дата
Msg-id 10029.1215442263@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [PATCHES] WIP: executor_hook for pg_stat_statements  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>)
Ответы Re: [PATCHES] WIP: executor_hook for pg_stat_statements  (ITAGAKI Takahiro <itagaki.takahiro@oss.ntt.co.jp>)
Re: [PATCHES] WIP: executor_hook for pg_stat_statements  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> On Mon, 2008-07-07 at 11:03 +0900, ITAGAKI Takahiro wrote:
>> One issue is "tag" field. The type is now uint32. It's enough in my plugin,
>> but if some people need to add more complex structures in PlannedStmt,
>> Node type would be better rather than uint32. Which is better?

> I was imagining that tag was just an index to another data structure,
> but probably better if its a pointer.

I don't want the tag there at all, much less converted to a pointer.
What would the semantics be of copying the node, and why?

Please justify why you must have this and can't do what you want some
other way.
        regards, tom lane


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Zdenek Kotala
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: PATCH: CITEXT 2.0 v2
Следующее
От: Bernd Helmle
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Schema-qualified statements in pg_dump output