Re: Command Triggers, patch v11

Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>

From: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, Thom Brown <thom@linux.com>, Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri@2ndquadrant.fr>
Date: 2012-03-19T13:13:26Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →
  1. Fix SPGiST vacuum algorithm to handle concurrent tuple motion properly.

  2. Remove useless const qualifier

  3. Make executor's SELECT INTO code save and restore original tuple receiver.

On Sunday, March 18, 2012 07:29:30 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> BTW, I've been looking through how to do what I suggested earlier to get
> rid of the coziness and code duplication between CreateTableAs and the
> prepare.c code; namely, let CreateTableAs create a DestReceiver and then
> call ExecuteQuery with that receiver.  It appears that we still need at
> least two bits of added complexity with that approach:
> 
> 1. ExecuteQuery still has to know that's a CREATE TABLE AS operation so
> that it can enforce that the prepared query is a SELECT.  (BTW, maybe
> this should be weakened to "something that returns tuples", in view of
> RETURNING?)
I don't really see the use case but given the amount of work it probably takes 
it seems reasonable to allow that.

> 2. Since ExecuteQuery goes through the Portal machinery, there's no way
> for it to pass in eflags to control the table OIDs setup.  This is
> easily solved by adding an eflags parameter to PortalStart, which
> doesn't seem too awful to me, since the typical caller would just pass
> zero.  (ExecuteQuery would also have to know about testing
> interpretOidsOption to compute the eflags to use, unless we add an
> eflags parameter to it, which might be the cleaner option.)
If we go down this route I think adding an eflag is the better choice. Thinking 
of it - my patch already added that ;)

> In short I'm thinking: add an eflags parameter to PortalStart, and add
> both an eflags parameter and a "bool mustReturnTuples" parameter to
> ExecuteQuery.  This definitely seems cleaner than the current
> duplication of code.
Hm. I am not *that* convinced anymore. It wasn't that much duplication in the 
end...

Andres