Re: clearing opfuncid vs. parallel query
От | YUriy Zhuravlev |
---|---|
Тема | Re: clearing opfuncid vs. parallel query |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3545716.sE8tFNsRk9@dinodell обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: clearing opfuncid vs. parallel query (David Fetter <david@fetter.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: clearing opfuncid vs. parallel query
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thursday 22 October 2015 09:26:46 David Fetter wrote: > On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 07:15:35PM +0300, YUriy Zhuravlev wrote: > > Hello. > > Currently using nodeToString and stringToNode you can not pass a > > full plan. In this regard, what is the plan to fix it? Or in the > > under task parallel query does not have such a problem? > > > > > This turns out not to be straightforward to code, because we don't > > > have a generic plan tree walker, > > > > I have an inner development. I am using python analyzing header > > files and generates a universal walker (parser, paths ,executer and > > etc trees), as well as the serializer and deserializer to jsonb. > > Maybe I should publish this code? > > Please do. Tom Lane and Robert Haas are very unhappy with a python. Is there any reason? Thanks! -- YUriy Zhuravlev Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com The Russian Postgres Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: