| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Remaining calls of heap_close/heap_open in the tree |
| Date: | 2019-10-17 08:15:39 |
| Message-ID: | 19298.1571300139@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> On 2019-10-17 10:47:06 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> I have just bumped into $subject, and we now use the table_*
>> equivalents in the code. Any objections to the simple patch attached
>> to clean up that?
> They're not really "remaining", as much as having been introduced after
> the introduction of table_open()/close()...
> Wonder if it's worth removing the backward compat ones from master? I
> don't quite think so, but...
If we don't remove 'em, we'll keep getting new calls from patches that
haven't been updated.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dilip Kumar | 2019-10-17 08:16:58 | Re: Questions/Observations related to Gist vacuum |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2019-10-17 08:14:25 | Re: parallel restore sometimes fails for FKs to partitioned tables |