Re: Macros bundling RELKIND_* conditions

On 08/02/2017 10:52 PM, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 11:15 PM, Alvaro Herrera
> <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>>> I think pg_class is a reasonable place to put more generic relkind lists
>>> alongside a matching error message for each, rather than specialized
>>> "does this relkind have storage" macros. What about something like a
>>> struct list in pg_class.h,
>>
>> I just noticed that this doesn't help at all with the initial problem
>> statement, which is that some of the relkind checks failed to notice
>> that partitioned tables needed to be added to the set. Maybe it still
>> helps because you have something to grep for, as Tom proposed elsewhere.
>
> Having something like relkind_i_t_T, though correct, doesn't make the
> test readable. That's another improvement because of using such
> macros. The macro name tells the purpose of the test, which is what a
> reader would be interested in, rather than the actual values used.

+1

Joe

--
Crunchy Data - http://crunchydata.com
PostgreSQL Support for Secure Enterprises
Consulting, Training, & Open Source Development