Re: Rename nodes/relation.h => nodes/pathnodes.h ? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Rename nodes/relation.h => nodes/pathnodes.h ?
Date
Msg-id 28718.1548775899@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Rename nodes/relation.h => nodes/pathnodes.h ?  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: Rename nodes/relation.h => nodes/pathnodes.h ?  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
List pgsql-hackers
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> On 2019-Jan-28, Tom Lane wrote:
>> (There was some mention of trying to split relation.h into multiple
>> files, but I fail to see any advantage in that.)

> Hmm, nodes/relation.h includes lots of other files and is widely
> included.

Yup, that's why I'm trying to reduce the number of files that include it,
over in the other thread.

> If we can split it usefully, I vote for that.  However, I
> failed to find any concrete proposal for doing that.  I don't have one
> ATM but I'd like to keep the door open for it happening at some point.

The door's always open, of course, but I don't see any point in waiting
around for a hypothetical redesign.

> I do like planner/pathnodes.h as a name, FWIW.

Yeah, I think I'll go with pathnodes.h.  We'd probably keep using that
for the Path node typedefs themselves, even if somebody comes up with
a design for splitting out other things.

            regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: Why does execReplication.c lock tuples?
Next
From: Christoph Berg
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Log PostgreSQL version number on startup