Re: printTable API (was: Show INHERIT in \du) - Mailing list pgsql-patches

From Brendan Jurd
Subject Re: printTable API (was: Show INHERIT in \du)
Date
Msg-id 37ed240d0804161637oe40e448je072e7984f32aff2@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: printTable API (was: Show INHERIT in \du)  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>)
Responses Re: printTable API (was: Show INHERIT in \du)  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>)
Re: printTable API (was: Show INHERIT in \du)  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>)
List pgsql-patches
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 7:27 AM, Alvaro Herrera  wrote:
> Brendan Jurd escribió:
>
>  > The second version of the patch is attached.
>
>  Thanks.  I looked the patch over and did some minor changes.  Modified
>  version attached.
>

Cool, I had a look through your changes and they all seemed fine to
me.  In particular, moving the header comments to the ... header ...
file seemed like a smart move. =)

>  One thing I'm not entirely happy about is the fact that we need a
>  pointer to the last footer/cell/header, so two pointers for each element
>  kind.
>

Well, the alternative is iterating through the array each time you
want to add something until you hit a NULL pointer, and adding the new
item at that point.  Considering we're only chewing up an extra 4 *
sizeof(pointer) = 16 bytes in the struct, it seems like a reasonable
price to pay for the convenience.

What is it about the extra fields that makes you unhappy?

Cheers,
BJ
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: http://getfiregpg.org

iD8DBQFIBo2y5YBsbHkuyV0RAmLhAJ9CP/9L1Nv7WbCtrCYu6tyoGhQItQCeMRm0
HegSSBq8tXw43Kj2xeQ2RCs=
=RvzP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

pgsql-patches by date:

Previous
From: "Alex Hunsaker"
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Patch for Prevent pg_dump/pg_restore from being affected by statement_timeout
Next
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: printTable API (was: Show INHERIT in \du)