Tom Lane wrote:
> I follow your reasoning, but I don't particularly want to make this
> patch wait on a large and invasive refactoring of existing headers.
Sure.
> As a down payment on this problem, maybe we could invent a new planner
> header that provides just enough info to support amapi.h and fdwapi.h;
> it looks like this would be "typedef struct PlannerInfo PlannerInfo;",
> likewise for RelOptInfo, ForeignPath, and IndexPath, and real declarations
> of Cost and Selectivity.
Works for me, under the assumption that, down the road and without any
rush, we can shuffle some more stuff around to make this whole area a
bit cleaner.
> Not sure what to name the new header.
Yeah, this is always a problem for such patches :-( I have no great
ideas ATM.
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
