Re: Questionable coding in proc.c & lock.c
От | Thomas Lockhart |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Questionable coding in proc.c & lock.c |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3981A5CA.B56F7740@alumni.caltech.edu обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | RE: Questionable coding in proc.c & lock.c ("Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue@tpf.co.jp>) |
Ответы |
Re: Questionable coding in proc.c & lock.c
Re: Questionable coding in proc.c & lock.c |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
> I think maybe what needs to be done to fix all this is to restructure > postgres.c's interface to the parser/rewriter. What we want is to > run just the yacc grammar initially to produce a list of raw parse > trees (which is enough to detect begin/commit/rollback, no?) Then > postgres.c walks down that list, and for each element, if it is > commit/rollback OR we are not in abort state, do parse analysis, > rewrite, planning, and execution. (Thomas, any comments here?) Sure, why not (restructure postgres.c that is)? I was just thinking about how to implement "autocommit" and was considering doing a hack in analyze.c which just plops a "BEGIN" in front of the existing query. But restructuring a bit higher up will let us make this a real feature, not a hack (I hope ;) btw, even gram.y does touch some of the heap cache (for pg_type) to look for type existance; don't know if that will be a problem but maybe that needs to be rethought also... - Thomas
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: