Re: Bizarre reindex_relation API - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Noah Misch
Subject Re: Bizarre reindex_relation API
Date
Msg-id 20110416170509.GB25433@tornado.leadboat.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Bizarre reindex_relation API  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 11:52:47AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Why in the world is reindex_relation defined like this?
> 
> #define REINDEX_CHECK_CONSTRAINTS    0x1
> #define REINDEX_SUPPRESS_INDEX_USE    0x2
> extern bool reindex_relation(Oid relid, bool toast_too, int flags);
> 
> Seems like a rational design would have folded toast_too in as another
> flag bit, instead of keeping it a separate argument.

`relid' and `toast_to' constitute the direct object, and `flags' are adverbs.
(Not sure if just made that up or actually rationalized it that way at the
time.)  No objection to changing it.


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Broken HOT chains in system catalogs
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: MMAP Buffers