Re: refactoring comment.c
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: refactoring comment.c |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 19953.1282069480@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: refactoring comment.c (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: refactoring comment.c
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: > On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 11:30 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> Rereading this, I see I didn't make my point very clearly. �The reason >> this code doesn't belong in parser/ is that there's no prospect the >> parser itself would ever use it. �ObjectAddress is an execution-time >> creature because we don't want utility statement representations to be >> resolved to OID-level detail before they execute. > Well, that is a good reason for doing it your way, but I'm slightly > fuzzy on why we need a crisp separation between parse-time and > execution-time. I don't insist that the separation has to be crisp. I'm merely saying that putting a large chunk of useful-only-at-execution-time code into backend/parser is the Wrong Thing. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: