Re: Properly pathify the union planner - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Properly pathify the union planner
Date
Msg-id 3485967.1711594595@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Properly pathify the union planner  (Richard Guo <guofenglinux@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Properly pathify the union planner
List pgsql-hackers
Richard Guo <guofenglinux@gmail.com> writes:
> On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 6:34 PM David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com> wrote:
>> The attached is roughly what I had in mind.  I've not taken the time
>> to see what comments need to be updated, so the attached aims only to
>> assist discussion.

> I like this idea.

I haven't studied the underlying problem yet, so I'm not quite
buying into whether we need this struct at all ... but assuming
we do, I feel like "PlannerContext" is a pretty poor name.
There's basically nothing to distinguish it from "PlannerInfo",
not to mention that readers would likely assume it's a memory
context of some sort.

Perhaps "SubqueryContext" or the like would be better?  It
still has the conflict with memory contexts though.

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: jian he
Date:
Subject: Re: Add pg_basetype() function to obtain a DOMAIN base type
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Add pg_basetype() function to obtain a DOMAIN base type