Re: splitting htup.h - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andres Freund
Subject Re: splitting htup.h
Date
Msg-id 201208291810.17323.andres@2ndquadrant.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: splitting htup.h  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: splitting htup.h
List pgsql-hackers
On Wednesday, August 29, 2012 05:47:14 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> > Excerpts from Tom Lane's message of mar ago 28 17:27:51 -0400 2012:
> >> Also, is there any reason to consider just moving those defs into
> >> heapam.h, instead of inventing a new header?  I'm not sure if there's
> >> any principled distinction between heap.h and heapam.h, or any
> >> significant differences between their sets of consumers.
> > 
> > [ yeah, there's quite a few files that would need heap.h but not heapam.h
> > ]
> 
> OK, scratch that thought then.  So we seem to be down to choosing a new
> name for what we're going to take out of htup.h.  If you don't like
> heap.h, maybe something like heap_tuple.h?  I'm not terribly excited
> about it either way though.  Any other ideas out there?
htup_details.h? That doesn't have the sound of "fringe details" that 
htup_private.h has.

Greetings,

Andres
-- Andres Freund                       http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training &
Services



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: splitting htup.h
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: MySQL search query is not executing in Postgres DB