| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Fabrízio de Royes Mello <fabriziomello(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Defining dedicated macro to grab a relation's persistence |
| Date: | 2014-11-11 15:37:42 |
| Message-ID: | 20141111153742.GS1791@alvin.alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Fabrízio de Royes Mello wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 11:12 AM, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
> wrote:
> > I personally find the direct access actually more readable, so I'm not a
> > fan of further extending the scheme. Consistency with some other common
> > accessors is an argument though.
>
> What you meant is "relation->rd_rel->relpersistence" is more readable than
> "RelationGetPersistence(relation)" ??
I too have a hard time getting excited about this change. I'd just
leave it alone.
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2014-11-11 15:39:22 | Re: 9.4RC1 next week |
| Previous Message | Fabrízio de Royes Mello | 2014-11-11 15:19:53 | Re: Defining dedicated macro to grab a relation's persistence |