Re: Tentative patch for making DROP put dependency info in DETAIL
Tom Lane <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.db.postgresql.devel.patches |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Alvaro Herrera <[email protected]> writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >> ... I wonder if it would >> be worth refactoring the code so that a multiple-object DROP is >> implemented via performMultipleDeletions(). This would have more >> than just cosmetic advantages: it would no longer matter what >> order you listed the tables in. But the refactoring required looks >> bigger and more tedious than I want to tackle right now. > Hmm, this is a bit ugly. I'd vote for doing the refactoring. However, > I'd say you should commit the patch you currently have and let one of > the younger hackers fix that problem -- it looks like an good beginner > project. Agreed --- I committed what I had, anyone want to volunteer for refactoring the execution of DropStmt? After looking again, I think that this is not technically very difficult, but coming up with something that looks tasteful to everyone might be tricky. In particular I didn't see a nice way to do it without using struct ObjectAddress in a bunch of header files that don't currently include dependency.h. A possible response to that is to move ObjectAddress into postgres.h, but that seems a bit ugly too. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-patches mailing list ([email protected]) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-patches