On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 10:48 PM, Atri Sharma <atri.j...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sorry, I missed this email. > > I was specifically targeting accessing tables inside Node evaluation hence > do not want to add new nodes. > > Thanks for your inputs! > > Regards, > > Atri > > On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 11:43 AM, Amit Langote < > langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote: > >> On 2016/01/05 14:30, Atri Sharma wrote: >> > On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 9:54 AM, Amit Langote < >> langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp> >> >> On 2016/01/05 3:53, Atri Sharma wrote: >> >>> I was wary to use SPI inside the executor for node evaluation >> functions. >> >>> Does it seem safe? >> >> >> >> What is "node evaluation functions"? Is it "Plan" nodes or "Expr" nodes >> >> that you are talking about? I guess you'd know to use ExecProcNode() or >> >> ExecEvalExpr() for them, respectively. >> >> >> > I fail to see the relevance of which node is getting evaluated (its a >> Plan >> > node BTW) for this question. The concern I had was around using SPI >> inside >> > executor and its fail safety. >> >> Sorry, I may have misunderstood your question(s). Seeing your first >> question in the thread, I see that you're looking to query non-system >> tables within the executor. AFAIU, most of the processing within executor >> takes the form of some node in some execution pipeline of a plan tree. >> Perhaps, you're imagining some kind of node, subnode or some such. By the >> way, some places like ATRewriteTable(), validateCheckConstraint() scan >> user tables directly using low-level utilities within a dummy executor >> context. I think Jim suggested something like that upthread. >> >> Sorry for top posting. Regards, Atri
