Re: [HACKERS] Delaying insertion of default values

> More generally, I wonder whether it is such a good idea for rules to be
> stored as parsetrees.  For example, I can't drop and recreate a table
> mentioned in a rule attached to a different table, because the compiled
> rule includes the OIDs of the tables it references.  So the compiled
> rule will start failing if I do that.  (Right now, this causes a core
> dump :-( ... apparently someone is assuming that the OID in an RTE will
> never be bad ...)
> 
> With rules stored as parsetrees, we need to be very careful about how
> much semantic knowledge gets factored into the parsetree before it is
> frozen as a rule.  (This is another reason for pushing "optimization"
> transformations out of the parser and into modules downstream of the
> rule rewriter, BTW.)
> 
> Comments?  Storing rules as plain text would be too slow, perhaps,
> but would it help any to store rules as "raw" parsetrees that haven't
> yet gone through analyze.c?

All this sounds good, though we have so many TODO items, it seems a
little of a reach to be going after this.  Seems like a good thing to do
as you add that extra phase of query processing.

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle maillist@candle.pha.pa.us            |  (610)
853-3000+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026