Re: Deparsing DDL command strings
Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>
From: Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>,
Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri@2ndquadrant.fr>
Date: 2012-10-05T15:28:27Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Friday, October 05, 2012 04:24:55 PM Tom Lane wrote: > Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > > On Friday, October 05, 2012 04:03:03 PM Tom Lane wrote: > >> Why don't you just pass the original query string, instead of writing > >> a mass of maintenance-requiring new code to reproduce it? > > > > Its not easy to know which tables are referenced in e.g. an ALTER TABLE > > statement if the original statement didn't schema qualify everything. > > What he's talking about is deparsing the raw grammar output, which by > definition contains no more information than is in the query string. > Deparsing post-parse-analysis trees is a different problem (for which > code already exists, unlike the raw-tree case). Sure. I am not saying Dimitri's approach is perfect. I am just listing some of reasons why I think just using the raw input string isn't sufficient... Andres -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services