Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >> Hmm. The bespoke code for constructing the attno map bothers me; >> surely there is existing code that does that? If not, it'd still >> make more sense to factor it out, I think, because there will be >> other needs for it in future.
> There isn't any that I could find -- all the existing callers of > map_variable_attnos build their map in other ways (while walking an > attribute array at construction time). [ pokes around... ] The code I was thinking of is convert_tuples_by_name in access/common/tupconvert.c. There's a bit of an API mismatch in that it wants to wrap the mapping array in a TupleConversionMap struct; but maybe we could refactor tupconvert.c to offer a way to get just the map array. > I also modified the algorithm to use the relcache instead of walking the > child's attribute list for each parent attribute (that was silly). Hmm. That might be better in a big-O sense but I doubt it's faster for reasonable numbers of columns. > My rationale when writing the event trigger code was that each command > would only be published once, for the parent table, not recursively for > each child. So only the original expression should be seen. Oh good; then we're just talking about a localized bug fix and not a protocol break for event triggers. 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