Re: reducing the footprint of ScanKeyword (was Re: Large writable variables)

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> I'm kinda surprised that you haven't seen ScanKeywordLookup() in
> there, but I agree with you that the size of the main parser tables is
> a real issue, and that there's no easy solution. At various times
> there has been discussion of using some other parser generator, and
> I've also toyed with the idea of writing one specifically for
> PostgreSQL. Unfortunately, it seems like bison is all but
> unmaintained; the alternatives are immature and have limited adoption
> and limited community; and writing something from scratch is a ton of
> work.  :-(

Yeah, and also: SQL is a damn big and messy language, and so it's not
very clear that it's really bison's fault that it's slow to parse.
We might do a ton of work to implement an alternative, and then find
ourselves no better off.

            regards, tom lane