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

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: clearing opfuncid vs. parallel query
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoYR4TsEGbeKqX0eZU13LMe3Abtq+TM0bLyUMNXcixmq3Q@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: clearing opfuncid vs. parallel query  (YUriy Zhuravlev <u.zhuravlev@postgrespro.ru>)
Responses Re: clearing opfuncid vs. parallel query  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Re: clearing opfuncid vs. parallel query  (YUriy Zhuravlev <u.zhuravlev@postgrespro.ru>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 1:40 PM, YUriy Zhuravlev
<u.zhuravlev@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
> On Thursday 22 October 2015 13:25:52 you wrote:
>> It would be more useful, if we're going to autogenerate code,
> Are we going to use autogenerate code?

I thought that's what you were proposing.  Process the struct
definitions and emit .c files.

>> to do it from the actual struct definitions.
> I can gen xml/json from actual struct. I offered XML/JSON as the analysis of C
> code much more difficult. But my current generator just use the structure from
> the header files (by pycparser).

Anything that is part of the build process will have to be done in C or Perl.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: dinesh kumar
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] SQL function to report log message
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: make Gather node projection-capable