Re: generic pseudotype IO functions?

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: generic pseudotype IO functions?
Date: 2014-01-06 16:11:11
Message-ID: 52CAD59F.20703@gmx.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 1/6/14, 10:29 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Pseudotype.c/pg_proc.h are slowly growing a number of pretty
>> useless/redundant copy&pasted functions... Most for cases that are
>> pretty damn unlikely to be hit by users not knowing what they do.
>
> That's hardly the largest cost associated with inventing a new pseudotype.
> Nor are there lots of new pseudotypes coming down the pike, anyway.

If someone wants to do the work, what's the harm in reducing some code
redundancy?

>> What about adding a pseudotype_in/out that just error out with a generic
>> message?
>
> This will break some of the function sanity checks in opr_sanity,

Then the tests can be changed.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2014-01-06 16:22:46 Re: dynamic shared memory and locks
Previous Message Robert Haas 2014-01-06 16:08:41 Re: ERROR: missing chunk number 0 for toast value