Re: CustomScan in a larger structure (RE: CustomScan support on readfuncs.c)

2016-02-13 0:11 GMT+09:00 Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>:
> On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 9:56 AM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
>> On 2016-02-10 23:26:20 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
>>> I think the part about whacking around the FDW API is a little more
>>> potentially objectionable to others, so I want to hold off doing that
>>> unless a few more people chime in with +1. Perhaps we could start a
>>> new thread to talk about that specific idea. This is useful even
>>> without that, though.
>>
>> FWIW, I can delete a couple hundred lines of code from citusdb thanks to
>> this...
>>
>> A quick questions about what you committed:
>>
>>> @@ -527,10 +532,17 @@ extern PGDLLIMPORT Node *newNodeMacroHolder;
>>> */
>>> extern char *nodeToString(const void *obj);
>>>
>>> +struct Bitmapset; /* not to include bitmapset.h here */
>>> +struct StringInfoData; /* not to include stringinfo.h here */
>>> +extern void outToken(struct StringInfoData *str, const char *s);
>>> +extern void outBitmapset(struct StringInfoData *str,
>>> + const struct Bitmapset *bms);
>>> +
>>> /*
>>> * nodes/{readfuncs.c,read.c}
>>> */
>>> extern void *stringToNode(char *str);
>>> +extern struct Bitmapset *readBitmapset(void);
>>
>> why exactly did you expose read/writeBitmapset(), and nothing else?
>> Afaics a lot of the other read routines are also pretty necessary from
>> the outside?
>
> Because that's what KaiGai submitted and I had no reason to
> second-guess it. I'm happy to expose other stuff along similar lines
> if somebody writes a patch for it.
>
Although we have various service macro in outfuncs.c and readfuncs.c,
it is not a big burden for extension authors to write equivalent code,
except for string and bitmap. On the other hands, string needs _outToken,
bitmap needs _outBitmap. It is not good idea to suggest extensions to
have copy & paste code with no clear reason.

Thanks,
--
KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp>