I wrote: > I'm inclined to think that if we provide this function in core at all, > it should take a parameter list long enough to let it fill in the Path > completely. That would imply that any future changes in Path structs > would result in a change in the parameter list, which would break > callers --- but it would break them in an obvious way that the C > compiler would complain about. If we leave it as-is, those same callers > would be broken silently, because they'd just be failing to fill in > the new Path fields.
I've committed the PlanForeignScan API change, with that change and some other minor editorialization. The pgsql_fdw patch now needs an update, so I set it back to Waiting On Author state. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers