Greetings,
* Michael Paquier (michael@paquier.xyz) wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 09, 2018 at 08:15:07AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 08, 2018 at 08:46:08AM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> >> We should really have a more clearly defined policy around this, but my
> >> recollection is that we often prefer to return NULL rather than throwing
> >> an error for the convenience of people doing things like querying
> >> pg_class using similar functions.
> >
> > Yes, that's visibly right. At least that's what I can see from the
> > various pg_get_*def and pg_*_is_visible. Returning NULL would indeed
> > be more consistent.
>
> Thinking more about your argument, scanning fully pg_class is quite
> sensible as well because there is no need to apply an extra qual on
> relkind, so let's change the function as you suggest, by returning NULL
> on invalid relation type. Any opinions about the attached then which
> does the switch?
Looks alright on a quick glance, but shouldn't you also update the
comment..?
Thanks!
Stephen
