Re: Refactor query normalization into core query jumbling
| От | Michael Paquier |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Refactor query normalization into core query jumbling |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | acsMzhxJ6lGbbel5@paquier.xyz обсуждение |
| Ответ на | Re: Refactor query normalization into core query jumbling (Sami Imseih <samimseih@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Refactor query normalization into core query jumbling
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Mar 30, 2026 at 02:20:47PM -0500, Sami Imseih wrote: >> I see where you're coming from on that, but I don't think we can >> remove anything here in practice: > > Yes. Not unless we want to rely on the parser to track the lengths in > Const, which could be invasive, but I have not looked into it. Hmm. We may not want to get down to that, still that would be cheaper than reprocessing the parsing of the query string twice. >> I still think it'd be reasonable for us to include >> ComputeConstantLengths in core to complete the picture of what we're >> doing with _jumbleElements and the length field already anyway. Its >> basically a way to fully hydrate the partially filled out JumbleState >> from the initial jumble. > > I fully agree, ComputeConstantLengths is an optional post-jumble-query step > for a consumer that wishes to calculate the lengths. The length calculation > is not unique to a plug-in, so in my mind the work it's doing is core > jumbling functionality. Okay. I could fall into that for this release. Marking the JumbleState as a const is the most important piece here. I'm +-0 regarding this routine, but I can also see your point about how it's useful to give at least the option to extensions to have a recomputation of the Const lengths, the same way as PGSS. What are the extensions that would use that? -- Michael
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: