Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add notion of a "transform function" that can simplify function
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add notion of a "transform function" that can simplify function |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 13690.1332517009@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add notion of a "transform function" that can simplify function (Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add notion of a "transform function" that can simplify function
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com> writes: > On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 10:55:52AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> Why exactly was this thought to be a good idea: >> >>> * A NULL original expression disables use of transform functions while >>> * retaining all other behaviors. > I did it that way because it looked wrong to pass the same CoerceViaIO node to > transforms of both the input and output functions. Thinking about it again > now, doing so imposes no fundamental problems. Feel welcome to change it. Oh, I see your point --- it's not obvious whether the current transform is meant for the input or the output function. Which is a very good point. In principle the transform function could figure out which end of that it must be, but it would be ugly. However, see my response to Robert: why are we passing the original node to the transform function at all? It would be more useful and easier to work with to pass the function's fully-processed argument list, I believe. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: