On Wed, Jul 14, 2021 at 02:02:18PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > > Hm. I guess this point (i.e. that the Param substitution should result > in the identical plan tree as writing a literal constant would have) > has some force. I still feel like your application is pretty shaky, > but I don't really have any ideas about feasible ways to make it better.
I totally agree that it's quite shaky, but I also don't have a better idea on how to improve it. In the meantime it already saved my former colleagues and I (and I'm assuming other people) many hours of boring and tedious work. > Will push the patch. Thanks a lot!
