On Friday, October 05, 2012 04:24:55 PM Tom Lane wrote: > Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > > On Friday, October 05, 2012 04:03:03 PM Tom Lane wrote: > >> Why don't you just pass the original query string, instead of writing > >> a mass of maintenance-requiring new code to reproduce it? > > > > Its not easy to know which tables are referenced in e.g. an ALTER TABLE > > statement if the original statement didn't schema qualify everything. > > What he's talking about is deparsing the raw grammar output, which by > definition contains no more information than is in the query string. > Deparsing post-parse-analysis trees is a different problem (for which > code already exists, unlike the raw-tree case).
Sure. I am not saying Dimitri's approach is perfect. I am just listing some of reasons why I think just using the raw input string isn't sufficient... Andres -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
