Re: WIP: Rework access method interface - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alexander Korotkov
Subject Re: WIP: Rework access method interface
Date
Msg-id CAPpHfdvjr=2HXnMnW6Q3StD7E7TQzRnk=vRz+htXE7rF9NTo3A@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: WIP: Rework access method interface  (Petr Jelinek <petr@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Sep 7, 2015 at 10:02 PM, Petr Jelinek <petr@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
On 2015-09-07 20:56, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
On Mon, Sep 7, 2015 at 9:17 PM, Petr Jelinek <petr@2ndquadrant.com

    However I don't like the naming differences between validate_opclass
    and amvalidate. If you expect that the current amvalidate will only
    be used for opclass validation then it should be renamed accordingly.


I'm not yet sure if we need separate validation of opfamilies.


Well either the amvalidate or the validate_opclass should be renamed IMHO, depending on which way the checking goes (one interface for everything with generic name or multiple interfaces for multiple validations).

Yes, I agree with you about naming.
I'm not sure about separate validation of opfamilies independent of its naming. I'd like to get any arguments/advises about it.

------
Alexander Korotkov
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company 

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Joe Conway
Date:
Subject: Re: One question about security label command
Next
From: Jeff Davis
Date:
Subject: Re: PATCH: numeric timestamp in log_line_prefix