Re: Funny representation in pg_stat_statements.query.
От | Kyotaro HORIGUCHI |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Funny representation in pg_stat_statements.query. |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20140122.145239.203829193.horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Funny representation in pg_stat_statements.query. (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Funny representation in pg_stat_statements.query.
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hello, > >> Since this becomes more than a simple bug fix, I think it is too > >> late for 9.4 now. I'll work on this in the longer term. > > OK. I will get around to it someday, but if you do it first, that's fine. Nevertheless of my words, the drive is getting diminished after the issue was settled:-p Anyway I'll keep this in my mind. > > The fundamental cause of this issue is Const node which conveys > > the location of other than constant tokens. Any other nodes, for > > instance TypeCasts, are safe. > > > So this is fixed by quite simple way like following getting rid > > of the referred difficulties of keeping the code sane and total > > loss of token locations. (white spaces are collapsed for readability) > > Huh, that's a cute idea. It's certainly a kluge with a capital K, > and might fail to extend to new cases; but if we're intending to > replace all these cases with new special-purpose parse nodes soon, > neither of those objections seem very strong. Yes, but reforming parser so as to use special-purpose nodes impacts largely so this measure was brought up for the offhand. > The main concern I'd have would be whether there could be any weird > change in error cursor locations, but right offhand that's probably > not a problem. We know in each of these cases that there will be > some node produced by the coercion step, so the location won't > disappear entirely, and so exprLocation() of the node tree as a > whole should be the same. Not labeling the A_Const could result in > failure to produce an error location for a complaint about invalid > input for the coercion --- but surely that should never happen in > any of these cases. Surely. > So right offhand I think this is probably workable, and while it's > ugly it's an appropriate amount of effort to put into code whose > days are numbered anyhow. Thank you. reagrds, -- Kyotaro Horiguchi NTT Open Source Software Center
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: