Re: Materialized View Patch File

Hi

On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 3:25 PM, Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com> wrote:
> On 29 May 2013 10:40, Neel Patel <neel(dot)patel(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>> Hi Dave,
>>
>> Please find the updated patch after fixing some of the issues and comments
>> given by Ashesh.
>
> Just realised this reply has been in my draft folder for over a month...
>
>
> This comment appears to be incomplete:
>
> //While editing the view, if it is materialized view then only change

Yeah, please fix that Neel. Not sure what you were trying to say.

>
> The section of if... else if... else if... that begins with:
>
> if (name == wxT("autovacuum_vacuum_cost_delay"))
>
> should probably use:
>
> switch(name)
> {
> case wxT("autovacuum_vacuum_cost_delay")
>
> case ...
> }

wxString's don't play nicely with switch(), if memory serves.

> Given the amount of duplicate functionality this shares with tables,
> is there not a way there could be a common class they could both
> inherit from to reduce maintenance overhead?

Probably not a great deal of benefit. In any case, it would certainly
require a lot of refactoring which is far more work than we have time
for.

--
Dave Page
Chief Architect, Tools & Installers
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com
Twitter: @pgsnake