Re: Identifying no-op length coercions - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Identifying no-op length coercions
Date
Msg-id 20117.1307818998@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Identifying no-op length coercions  (Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>)
Responses Re: Identifying no-op length coercions
List pgsql-hackers
Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com> writes:
> Good points.  I'm thinking, then, add an Expr argument to simplify_function()
> and have the CoerceViaIO branch of eval_const_expressions_mutator() pass NULL
> for both its simplify_function() calls.  If simplify_function() gets a NULL Expr
> for a function that has a protransform, synthesize a FuncExpr based on its other
> arguments before calling the transform function.  Seem reasonable?  Granted,
> that would be dead code until someone applies a transform function to a type I/O
> function, which could easily never happen.  Perhaps just ignore the transform
> function when we started with a CoerceViaIO node?

Until we actually have a use-case for simplifying I/O functions like this,
I can't see going out of our way for it ...
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Kevin Grittner"
Date:
Subject: Re: Small SSI issues
Next
From: Jeroen Vermeulen
Date:
Subject: Re: [BUG] Denormal float values break backup/restore