Re: Deparsing rewritten query - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Pavel Stehule
Subject Re: Deparsing rewritten query
Date
Msg-id CAFj8pRBjjwCxf9saXRdsm0C-=b2U3nsQ9NvAQzCZwJCoQbN8yg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Deparsing rewritten query  (Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Deparsing rewritten query  (Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers


pá 4. 2. 2022 v 10:36 odesílatel Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com> napsal:
Hi,

On Wed, Feb 02, 2022 at 07:49:41PM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>
> I checked this trivial patch, and I don't see any problem. Again I run
> check-world with success. The documentation for this feature is not
> necessary. But I am not sure about regress tests. Without any other code,
> enfosing printalias will be invisible. What do you think about the
> transformation of your extension to a new module in src/test/modules? Maybe
> it can be used for other checks in future.

I'm not opposed, but previously Tom explicitly said that he thinks this feature
is useless and is strongly opposed to making any kind of promise that the
current interface to make it possible (if get_query_def() is exposed) would be
maintained.  Adding such a test module would probably a reason to reject the
patch altogether.  I'm just hoping that this change, which is a no-op for
any legal query, is acceptable.  It can only break something if you feed wrong
data to get_query_def(), which would be my problem and not the project's
problem.

ok, I don't have any problem with it. Then there is not necessarily any change, and I'll mark this patch as ready for committer.

Regards

Pavel
 

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Dag Lem
Date:
Subject: Re: Add psql command to list constraints
Next
From: Amit Kapila
Date:
Subject: Re: [BUG]Update Toast data failure in logical replication