On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 11:09 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Atri Sharma <atri.jiit@gmail.com> writes: > I fail to see the relevance of which node is getting evaluated (its a Plan > node BTW) for this question. The concern I had was around using SPI inside > executor and its fail safety.
The code path executor -> PL function -> SPI certainly works, so presumably omitting the intermediate PL function could still work. Whether it's a good idea is another question entirely. I do not offhand see a good reason why knowledge of non-system tables should exist in the core executor; so what is the need to use SPI?
Thanks!
This was a weird requirement and managed to work around it but I will keep this hack for future reference.