From: | John Gray <jgray(at)azuli(dot)co(dot)uk> |
---|---|
To: | Hackers List <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Cc: | Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> |
Subject: | commands subdirectory continued -code cleanup |
Date: | 2002-04-19 19:12:06 |
Message-ID: | 1019243530.1374.179.camel@adzuki |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Dear all,
I've been looking at tidying up some of the repeated code which now
resides in tablecmds.c - in particular the ALTER TABLE ALTER COLUMN
code.
Most of these routines share common code:
1) AccessExclusive Lock on relation.
2) Relation is a table, not a system table, user is owner.
3) Recurse over child relations.
And several routines then:
4) check column exists
5) check column is not a system attribute
I would propose to combine these checks into two routines:
CanAlterTable(relid,systemOK) [systemOK is for the set statistics case]
GetTargetAttnum(relid,Attname) returns attnum
[This would bring some consistency to checking, for example fixing the
current segfault if you try ALTER TABLE test ALTER COLUMN xmin SET
DEFAULT 3;]
and two macros:
RECURSE_OVER_CHILDREN(relid);
AlterTableDoSomething(childrel,...);
RECURSE_OVER_CHILDREN_END;
(this seems more straightforward than passing the text of the function
call as a macro parameter).
ALTER COLUMN RENAME
Currently, attributes in tables, views and sequences can be renamed.
-tables and views make sense, of course.
Sequences still seem to work after they've had attributes renamed, but I
see little value in being able to do this. Is it OK to prohibit the
renaming of sequence columns?
tcop/utility.c vs. commands/
There are also permissions checks made in tcop/utility.c before
AlterTableOwner and renamerel are called. It may be best to move these
into commands/tablecmds.c. It seems that tcop/utility.c was supposed to
handle the permissions checks for statements, but the inheritance
support has pushed some of that into commands/ . Should permissions
checking for other utility statements be migrated to commands/ for
consistency? I don't propose to do this now -but it might be a later
stage in the process.
If this general outline is OK, I'll work on a patch -this shouldn't be
quite as drastic as the last one :-)
Regards
John
--
John Gray ECHOES: sponsored walks for Christian Aid to the highest
Azuli IT points of English counties, 4th-6th May 2002
www.azuli.co.uk www.stannesmoseley.care4free.net/echoes.html
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | jtp | 2002-04-19 19:14:03 | general design question |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2002-04-19 18:53:49 | Re: Really annoying comments... |