From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-committers <pgsql-committers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add sql_drop event for event triggers |
Date: | 2013-04-09 16:28:03 |
Message-ID: | 3316.1365524883@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> I kind of wonder if there's some way we could split ProcessUtility()
> up into more digestible pieces. I can't really think of a good way to
> do it though, without writing duplicative switches.
I'm thinking a bit about
ProcessUtility()
{
switch (tag)
{
... cases for BEGIN etc ...
default:
ProcessSlowUtility(...)
}
}
ProcessSlowUtility()
{
event setup code
switch (tag)
{
... cases for everything else ...
default:
elog(ERROR)
}
event teardown code
}
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2013-04-09 16:36:03 | Re: [HACKERS] pgsql: Add sql_drop event for event triggers |
Previous Message | Dimitri Fontaine | 2013-04-09 16:25:59 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add sql_drop event for event triggers |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2013-04-09 16:36:03 | Re: [HACKERS] pgsql: Add sql_drop event for event triggers |
Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2013-04-09 16:27:52 | Re: page 1 of relation global/11787 was uninitialized |