* Tom Lane (tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
> On the whole I think we have to go back to the original plan of
> recursively searching the query's expressions after we've finished all
> the transformations (and have a completed jointree to refer to). This
> is slightly annoying on the grounds of adding parsing overhead that's
> completely useless unless per-column privileges are in use. On the
> other hand, none of the workable alternatives are exactly overhead-free
> either.
>
> Comments?
Honestly, I like this approach. There is some additional overhead
during parsing, but it seems cleaner and more robust. Also, hopefully
in most cases where people are concerned about parse time they're
preparing their queries. If it's warrented, we could try doing
benchmarks to see how bad the impact is and if we need to do something
different. It doesn't strike me as likely to be a significant amount of
overhead though.
Thanks,
Stephen