Re: [v9.2] DROP Reworks Part.1 - Consolidate routines to handle DropStmt

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: Kohei KaiGai <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp>, PgHacker <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [v9.2] DROP Reworks Part.1 - Consolidate routines to handle DropStmt
Date: 2011-07-06 18:02:13
Message-ID: CA+TgmobSHC=eS=v_gaqRnr6-dT2fqaUZV9gqhaMs7MhwReJBAA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 1:09 PM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
> Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of mié jul 06 12:40:39 -0400 2011:
>
>> This patch removes an impressive amount of boilerplate code and
>> replaces it with something much more compact.   I like that.  In the
>> interest of full disclosure, I suggested this approach to KaiGai at
>> PGCon, so I'm biased: but even so, I'm pleasantly surprised by the
>> amount of consolidation that appears possible here.
>
> Yeah.  Myself, I love the fact that the dropmsgstrings thing is gone.  I
> wonder if the routine to obtain "foo doesn't exist, skipping" messages
> could be replaced by judicious use of getObjectDescription.

I've been told we don't want to go further in that direction for
reasons of translatability.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jeff Davis 2011-07-06 18:02:20 Re: reducing the overhead of frequent table locks, v4
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2011-07-06 17:09:11 Re: [v9.2] DROP Reworks Part.1 - Consolidate routines to handle DropStmt