Re: Rethinking opclass member checks and dependency strength - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Anastasia Lubennikova
Subject Re: Rethinking opclass member checks and dependency strength
Date
Msg-id 3f88a8eb-7893-7f6c-6a06-9a21852a34a7@postgrespro.ru
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Rethinking opclass member checks and dependency strength  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Rethinking opclass member checks and dependency strength  (Hamid Akhtar <hamid.akhtar@gmail.com>)
Re: Rethinking opclass member checks and dependency strength  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 31.03.2020 23:45, Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
>> Still haven't got a better naming idea, but in the meantime here's
>> a rebase to fix a conflict with 612a1ab76.

Maybe "amadjustmembers" will work?

I've looked through the patch and noticed this comment:

+            default:
+                /* Probably we should throw error here */
+                break;

I suggest adding an ERROR or maybe Assert, so that future developers 
wouldn't
forget about setting dependencies. Other than that, the patch looks good 
to me.

-- 
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Multi-byte character case-folding
Next
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: SQL/JSON: functions