Re: clearing opfuncid vs. parallel query - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From YUriy Zhuravlev
Subject Re: clearing opfuncid vs. parallel query
Date
Msg-id 3545716.sE8tFNsRk9@dinodell
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: clearing opfuncid vs. parallel query  (David Fetter <david@fetter.org>)
Responses Re: clearing opfuncid vs. parallel query
List pgsql-hackers
On Thursday 22 October 2015 09:26:46 David Fetter wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 07:15:35PM +0300, YUriy Zhuravlev wrote:
> > Hello.
> > Currently using nodeToString and stringToNode you can not pass a
> > full plan. In this regard, what is the plan to fix it? Or in the
> > under task parallel query does not have such a problem?
> > 
> > > This turns out not to be straightforward to code, because we don't
> > > have a generic plan tree walker,
> > 
> > I have an inner development. I am using python analyzing header
> > files and generates a universal walker (parser, paths ,executer and
> > etc trees), as well as the serializer and deserializer to jsonb.
> > Maybe I should publish this code?
> 
> Please do.
Tom Lane and Robert Haas are very unhappy with a python. Is there any reason? 

Thanks!

-- 
YUriy Zhuravlev
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: YUriy Zhuravlev
Date:
Subject: Re: clearing opfuncid vs. parallel query
Next
From: Alexander Korotkov
Date:
Subject: Re: clearing opfuncid vs. parallel query