Re: Tentative patch for making DROP put dependency info in DETAIL - Mailing list pgsql-patches

From Alex Hunsaker
Subject Re: Tentative patch for making DROP put dependency info in DETAIL
Date
Msg-id 34d269d40806120031r507b5ebanbfeb7f9826e692a1@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Tentative patch for making DROP put dependency info in DETAIL  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Tentative patch for making DROP put dependency info in DETAIL  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>)
List pgsql-patches
On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 4:07 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Agreed --- I committed what I had, anyone want to volunteer for
> refactoring the execution of DropStmt?

Sure! see the attached patch...

> After looking again, I think that this is not technically very
> difficult, but coming up with something that looks tasteful to everyone
> might be tricky.  In particular I didn't see a nice way to do it without
> using struct ObjectAddress in a bunch of header files that don't
> currently include dependency.h.  A possible response to that is to move
> ObjectAddress into postgres.h, but that seems a bit ugly too.

Ok I'm obviously missing something important... Why not Just make the
various Remove* functions take a list?

I'm not proposing this patch for actual submission, more of a would this work?
If I'm not missing something glaring obvious Ill go ahead and make the
rest of the Remove things behave the same way

Attachment

pgsql-patches by date:

Previous
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: Tentative patch for making DROP put dependency info in DETAIL
Next
From: Greg Sabino Mullane
Date:
Subject: Better formatting of functions in pg_dump