Peter Geoghegan <p...@heroku.com> writes:
> On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 12:22 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> It seems unlikely to me that recursing into the name lists is helpful
>> here: those are not going to contain any data that is interpretable
>> without context. Did you have a reason to do that?
> I saw no reason to avoid the extra cycles. A noticeable omission has a
> cost: it gets noticed. Given this code path is likely to hardly ever
> be hit, this mechanical approach seemed best. That's all.
I agree that performance isn't much of a concern, but code bloat and
inconsistency with other cases are valid concerns. That function does
not recurse into name lists in, for example, the A_Expr and FuncCall
cases.
Also, related to this complaint though not this patch, it's disturbing
that this oversight wasn't detected long ago. My first thought was to add
some conditionally-compiled debugging code that just performs a no-op
traverse of every raw parse tree produced by the grammar. However that
doesn't work because raw_expression_tree_walker doesn't promise to support
everything, only DML statements. Thoughts?
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
