Tom Lane wrote:
> A difficulty with either your patch or my idea is that they require adding
> another field to ExplainState, which is an ABI break for any third-party
> code that might be declaring variables of that struct type. That's fine
> for HEAD but would be risky to back-patch. Any thoughts about whether we
> can get away with that (ie, anybody have an idea if there are third-party
> extensions that call explain.c)?
codesearch.debian.net shows a couple of hits for ExplainState in
multicorn (an extension for FDW from Python data sources); I didn't look
but it seems that the FDW API is using that struct.
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services