Re: Make printtup a bit faster
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Andy Fan <zhihuifan1213@163.com>
Cc: Andreas Karlsson <andreas@proxel.se>, David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>,
pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2024-09-11T01:18:52Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Andy Fan <zhihuifan1213@163.com> writes: > Just to be clearer, I'd like work on the out function only due to my > internal assignment. (Since David planned it for PG18, so it is better > say things clearer eariler). I'd put parts of out(print) function > refactor in the next 2 days. I think it deserves a double check before > working on *all* the out function. Well, sure. You *cannot* write a patch that breaks existing output functions. Not at the start, and not at the end either. You should focus on writing the infrastructure and, for starters, converting just a few output functions as a demonstration. If that gets accepted then you can work on converting other output functions a few at a time. But they'll never all be done, because we can't realistically force extensions to convert. There are lots of examples of similar incremental conversions in our project's history. I think the most recent example is the "soft error handling" work (d9f7f5d32, ccff2d20e, and many follow-on patches). regards, tom lane