Robert Haas <[email protected]> writes:
> I don't really understand why you're so fixed on this point. I think
> that the code as I wrote it is quite a normal way to write code for
> that kind of thing.
Also, we have numerous other places that generate de-duplicated names
in pretty much this way (ruleutils.c's set_rtable_names being a very
closely related case). I don't think we should go inventing some
random new way to do that.
If it turns out that Robert's code is too slow in practice, I would
prefer to deal with that by using a hashtable to keep track of
already-allocated names, not by changing the user-visible behavior.
I'm content to wait for field complaints before building such logic
though, because I really doubt that queries would ever have so
many subplans as to be a problem.
regards, tom lane
