On 23/11/2018 17:39, David Fetter wrote: > On Fri, Nov 23, 2018 at 12:03:27AM +0100, Petr Jelinek wrote: >> On 01/11/2018 01:29, Euler Taveira wrote: >>> Em qua, 28 de fev de 2018 às 20:03, Euler Taveira >>> <eu...@timbira.com.br> escreveu: >>>> The attached patches add support for filtering rows in the publisher. >>>> >>> I rebased the patch. I added row filtering for initial >>> synchronization, pg_dump support and psql support. 0001 removes unused >>> code. 0002 reduces memory use. 0003 passes only structure member that >>> is used in create_estate_for_relation. 0004 reuses a parser node for >>> row filtering. 0005 is the feature. 0006 prints WHERE expression in >>> psql. 0007 adds pg_dump support. 0008 is only for debug purposes (I'm >>> not sure some of these messages will be part of the final patch). >>> 0001, 0002, 0003 and 0008 are not mandatory for this feature. >> >> Hi, >> >> I think there are two main topics that still need to be discussed about >> this patch. >> >> Firstly, I am not sure if it's wise to allow UDFs in the filter clause >> for the table. The reason for that is that we can't record all necessary >> dependencies there because the functions are black box for parser. > > Some UDFs are not a black box for the parser, namely ones written in > SQL. Would it make sense at least not to foreclose the non-(black box) > option? >
Yeah inlinable SQL functions should be fine, we just need the ability to extract dependencies. -- Petr Jelinek http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
