On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 01:37:22AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> It's hard to muster much enthusiasm for extending print_expr(),
> considering how incomplete and little-used it is. I'd rather
> spend effort on ripping it out in favor of using the far more
> complete, and better-tested, code in ruleutils.c.
If it is possible to get the same amount of coverage when debugging
the planner, count me in. Now it seems to me that we'd still require
some work to get the same level of information as for range table
entry kinds..
--
Michael
