RE: [HACKERS] DROP TABLE inside a transaction block - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Hiroshi Inoue
Subject RE: [HACKERS] DROP TABLE inside a transaction block
Date
Msg-id 000001bf8960$8093d160$2801007e@tpf.co.jp
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] DROP TABLE inside a transaction block  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org
> [mailto:owner-pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org]On Behalf Of Bruce Momjian
> 
> > Looked like it was going to be very simple: the RelationGetRelationName
> > and RelationGetPhysicalRelationName macros encapsulate access to the
> > (relation)->rd_rel->relname structure member pretty effectively (thanks
> > to Bruce's temp. relation work, I presume)
> 
> Yes.
> 
> > As a first crack, I decided to use the oid for the filename, 
> just because
> > it simplified the chamges to the Macro, and there was already 
> an oidout()
> > builtin that'd do the palloc for me ;-)
> >

I object to this proposal.

I have been suspicious why mapping algorithm from relations
to the relation file names is needed for existent relations.
This should be changed first.

And pluaral relation file names are needed for a relation oid/relname.
Why do you prefer fixed mapping oid/relname --> relation file name ?

Regards.

Hiroshi Inoue
Inoue@tpf.co.jp




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Ross J. Reedstrom"
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] DROP TABLE inside a transaction block
Next
From: Tatsuo Ishii
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] regex (from TODO)