Re: CREATE TABLE LIKE INCLUDING INDEXES support

Hi,

On 5/23/07, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
> NikhilS <nikkhils(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > If so, I think we can introduce 2 Oid fields in the IndexStmt structure
> and
> > store the Oids there. In DefineIndex we can use these Oids if they are
> not
> > invalid.
>
> I think this is just make-work that causes the patch to complicate parts
> of the system it didn't need to touch. The original suggestion was to
> actively refactor existing code, which might or might not have been
> worthwhile. But this isn't an appropriate substitute --- it's just
> making the API uglier for no particular benefit.

I agree this will unnecessary add arguments to the DefineIndex API. If we
stick to the patch's earlier way of converting the Oid to names for just
these 2 arguments, we can avoid this IMO.

Considering that we will be generating this information from existing valid
index information, I think converting the Oids to names is safe enough.
Alvaro, do you think we should stick to the existing patch mechanism then
considering that it avoids polluting the API?

Regards,
Nikhils
--
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com