Re: [HACKERS] Macros bundling RELKIND_* conditions - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alvaro Herrera
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Macros bundling RELKIND_* conditions
Date
Msg-id 20170802174537.5cnazxn4mukokzb4@alvherre.pgsql
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Macros bundling RELKIND_* conditions  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Macros bundling RELKIND_* conditions  (Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> I think pg_class is a reasonable place to put more generic relkind lists
> alongside a matching error message for each, rather than specialized
> "does this relkind have storage" macros.  What about something like a
> struct list in pg_class.h,

I just noticed that this doesn't help at all with the initial problem
statement, which is that some of the relkind checks failed to notice
that partitioned tables needed to be added to the set.  Maybe it still
helps because you have something to grep for, as Tom proposed elsewhere.

However, if there are multiple places that should be kept in sync
regarding which relkinds to check, then I don't understand Robert's
objection that only one place requires the check.  Surely we're having
this discussion precisely because more than one place needs the check,
and finding those places is not obvious?

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Macros bundling RELKIND_* conditions
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] reload-through-the-top-parent switch the partition table