On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 11:12 AM, Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > On 2014-11-07 22:08:33 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > > After looking at a patch of this commit fest using > > rd_rel->relpersistence, I got a look at how many times this expression > > was being used directly in the backend code and wondered if it would > > not be useful to add a dedicated macro in rel.h to get the persistence > > of a relation like in the patch attached. (Note: it is actually used > > 39 times). > > I personally find the direct access actually more readable, so I'm not a > fan of further extending the scheme. Consistency with some other common > accessors is an argument though. >
What you meant is "relation->rd_rel->relpersistence" is more readable than "RelationGetPersistence(relation)" ??
