Re: [HACKERS] equal: don't know whether nodes of type 600 are equal
От | jwieck@debis.com (Jan Wieck) |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] equal: don't know whether nodes of type 600 are equal |
Дата | |
Msg-id | m109Sdx-000EBPC@orion.SAPserv.Hamburg.dsh.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] equal: don't know whether nodes of type 600 are equal (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] equal: don't know whether nodes of type 600 are equal
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote: > I do not think that extending copyObject to handle 604 (T_SelectStmt) > is necessarily the right fix here. I am casting a wary eye on > the first lines of ExplainOneQuery: > > /* plan the queries (XXX we've ignored rewrite!!) */ > plan = planner(query); > > I think the real problem is that the EXCEPT/INTERSECT code is dependent > on rewrite work that is not being done in the EXPLAIN path, and that > we need to fix that underlying problem rather than patching the symptom. > Otherwise we'll likely just hit another symptom... I added the call to QueryRewrite() in ExplainQuery() some time ago. So the comment in ExplainOneQuery() isn't right (and I should have removed that). Jan -- #======================================================================# # It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. # # Let's break this rule - forgive me. # #======================================== jwieck@debis.com (Jan Wieck) #
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: