From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Nikolay Shaplov <dhyan(at)nataraj(dot)su> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Nikita Glukhov <n(dot)gluhov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [PATCH][PROPOSAL] Add enum releation option type |
Date: | 2019-01-03 21:12:05 |
Message-ID: | [email protected] |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Attached version 7, with some renaming and rewording of comments.
(I also pgindented. Some things are not pretty because of lack of
typedefs.list patching ... a minor issue at worst.)
I'm still not satisfied with the way the builtin enum tables are passed.
Can we settle for using add_enum_reloption instead at initialization
time? Maybe that would be less ugly. Alternatively, we can have
another member in relopt_enum which is a function pointer that returns
the array of relopt_enum_elt_def. Not sure at which point to call that
function, though.
I think it would be great to have a new enum option in, say,
contrib/bloom, to make sure the add_enum_reloption stuff works
correctly. If there's nothing obvious to add there, let's add something
to src/test/modules.
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
enum-reloptions-7.diff | text/x-diff | 15.7 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2019-01-03 21:38:17 | Re: Unified logging system for command-line programs |
Previous Message | Thomas Munro | 2019-01-03 21:08:25 | Re: pgsql: Update ssl test certificates and keys |