Re: 7.2 stuff
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: 7.2 stuff |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 17242.1006834868@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: 7.2 stuff ("Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au>) |
Ответы |
Re: 7.2 stuff
(Philip Warner <pjw@rhyme.com.au>)
Re: 7.2 stuff (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
"Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au> writes: > Tell me what I should do for 7.2... At this point, none of these are on the radar screen for 7.2; we are in "get the release out" mode, and anything that's not a critical bug fix need not apply. But here are some comments for 7.3 and beyond. > Is there a pg_get_* function for getting foreign key definitions yet? No, but it seems like possibly a good idea. We should try to move away from applications looking directly at the system catalogs, and introduce some layer of indirection so that catalog changes don't break so many things. pg_get_xxx functions are one approach. Peter E. has suggested that implementing the SQL92 informational views might be a better (more standards-compliant) way of providing that indirection. That's cool to the extent that it works, but I wonder whether we won't find that the SQL92 views omit important Postgres extensions. Anyway, this is a long-term project. > It looked to me that pgclass.relfkeys wasn't ever being set or updated. Is > this true/correct? I cannot find any references to it in the code, either. > For instance, I would like to be able to pg_dump all the diary tables in one > go. > ie. pg_dump -t diary_\* audb > dump.sql > Don't know if there would be widespread enough demand for this feature > tho... I've seen requests for that before ... and I don't think they were all from you ;-). Seems like a reasonable wishlist item to me. > * DOCUMENT PG_TRIGGER > - Doesn't seem to be in the system catalog documentation... > Yeah, pg_trigger does not appear on this page: It's in the current sources. Perhaps you're looking at an obsolete mirror? > Basically I was getting the impression that the command.c was getting big > and fat and that it might be nice to split all the ALTER* commands into an > alter.c or something. Cool with me. We often fail to spend enough effort on code beautification projects; that hurts the maintainability of the project in the long run. Feel free to devise and implement a better division of the ALTER code. (And as I think we already talked about, it'd also be cool to try to merge the common infrastructure of the ALTER commands somehow. I don't like umpteen copied-and-pasted versions of the same code, either ...) regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: