From: | Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: PG10 Partitioned tables and relation_is_updatable() |
Date: | 2017-06-12 18:45:44 |
Message-ID: | 15c3e7db-0ed6-844b-8e92-4ffae2314e9d@joeconway.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 06/12/2017 11:33 AM, Dean Rasheed wrote:
> On 12 June 2017 at 17:51, Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> wrote:
>> After looking I remain convinced - +1 in general.
>
> Yes, I think this will probably help, but I worry that it will turn
> into quite a large and invasive patch, and there are a number of
> design choices to be made over the naming and precise set of macros.
> Is this really PG10 material?
I was wondering the same after responding. Possibly not.
> My initial thought, looking at the patch, is that it might be better
> to have all the macros in one file to make them easier to maintain.
Yeah, that was my thought as well.
>> sync in the future. Maybe something like this:
>> 8<-----------------
>> "\"%s\" is not a kind of relation that can have column comments"
>> 8<-----------------
>> Thoughts?
>
> -1. I think the existing error messages provide useful information
> that you'd be removing. If you're worried about the error messages
> getting out of sync, then wouldn't it be better to centralise them
> along with the corresponding macros?
I guess that could work too.
> Barring objections, I'll push my original patch and work up patches
> for the other couple of issues I found.
No objections here -- we definitely need to fix those.
Joe
--
Crunchy Data - http://crunchydata.com
PostgreSQL Support for Secure Enterprises
Consulting, Training, & Open Source Development
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jeff Janes | 2017-06-12 19:10:32 | Re: logical replication: \dRp+ and "for all tables" |
Previous Message | Dean Rasheed | 2017-06-12 18:33:49 | Re: PG10 Partitioned tables and relation_is_updatable() |