Re: CustomScan in a larger structure (RE: CustomScan support on readfuncs.c)
От | Andres Freund |
---|---|
Тема | Re: CustomScan in a larger structure (RE: CustomScan support on readfuncs.c) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20151111202944.GB27477@alap3.anarazel.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: CustomScan in a larger structure (RE: CustomScan support on readfuncs.c) (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: CustomScan in a larger structure (RE: CustomScan
support on readfuncs.c)
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2015-11-11 14:59:33 -0500, Robert Haas wrote: > I don't see this as being a particularly good idea. The same issue > exists for FDWs, and we're just living with it in that case. It's absolutely horrible there. I don't see why that's a justification for much. To deal with the lack of extensible copy/out/readfuncs I've just had to copy the entirety of readfuncs.c into an extension. Or you build replacements for those (as e.g. postgres_fdw essentially has done). > If we do want to improve it, I'm not sure this is the way to go, > either. I think there could be other designs where we focus on making > the serialization and deserialization options better, rather than > letting people tack stuff onto the struct. Just better serialization doesn't actually help all that much. Being able to conveniently access data directly, i.e. as fields in a struct, makes code rather more readable. And in many cases more efficient. Having to serialize internal datastructures unconditionally, just so copyfuncs.c works if actually used, makes for a fair amount of inefficiency (forced deserialization, even when not copying) and uglier code. Andres
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: