Hi,
On 5/23/07, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: NikhilS <nikkhils@gmail.com> writes:
> If so, I think we can introduce 2 Oid fields in the IndexStmt structure and
> store the Oids there. In DefineIndex we can use these Oids if they are not
> invalid.
I think this is just make-work that causes the patch to complicate parts
of the system it didn't need to touch. The original suggestion was to
actively refactor existing code, which might or might not have been
worthwhile. But this isn't an appropriate substitute --- it's just
making the API uglier for no particular benefit.
I agree this will unnecessary add arguments to the DefineIndex API. If we stick to the patch's earlier way of converting the Oid to names for just these 2 arguments, we can avoid this IMO.
Considering that we will be generating this information from existing valid index information, I think converting the Oids to names is safe enough. Alvaro, do you think we should stick to the existing patch mechanism then considering that it avoids polluting the API?
Regards,
Nikhils
--
EnterpriseDB
http://www.enterprisedb.com
