Re: [v9.2] DROP statement reworks - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Dimitri Fontaine
Subject Re: [v9.2] DROP statement reworks
Date
Msg-id m2r52uunv7.fsf@2ndQuadrant.fr
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [v9.2] DROP statement reworks  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [v9.2] DROP statement reworks
Re: [v9.2] DROP statement reworks
List pgsql-hackers
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> I think that new versions of patch can handle unified diffs without a
> problem, but older versions choke on them.  My Mac has 2.5.8 and
> handles unidiffs no problem.

Even containing git headers?

Here's what I'm talking about here:
src/backend/catalog/objectaddress.c |  653 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----src/include/catalog/objectaddress.h |
13+src/include/nodes/parsenodes.h      |    2 +-3 files changed, 575 insertions(+), 93 deletions(-)
 

diff --git a/src/backend/catalog/objectaddress.c b/src/backend/catalog/objectaddress.c
index 8feb601..6094146 100644
--- a/src/backend/catalog/objectaddress.c
+++ b/src/backend/catalog/objectaddress.c
@@ -82,6 +82,463 @@ static ObjectAddress get_object_address_opcf(ObjectType objtype, List *objname,
  List *objargs, bool missing_ok);static bool object_exists(ObjectAddress address);
 


Regards,
-- 
Dimitri Fontaine
http://2ndQuadrant.fr     PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Should we get rid of custom_variable_classes altogether?
Next
From: David Fetter
Date:
Subject: Re: Should we get rid of custom_variable_classes altogether?