Re: refactoring comment.c
| От | Tom Lane |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: refactoring comment.c |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 19953.1282069480@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение |
| Ответ на | Re: refactoring comment.c (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: refactoring comment.c
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 11:30 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> Rereading this, I see I didn't make my point very clearly. �The reason
>> this code doesn't belong in parser/ is that there's no prospect the
>> parser itself would ever use it. �ObjectAddress is an execution-time
>> creature because we don't want utility statement representations to be
>> resolved to OID-level detail before they execute.
> Well, that is a good reason for doing it your way, but I'm slightly
> fuzzy on why we need a crisp separation between parse-time and
> execution-time.
I don't insist that the separation has to be crisp. I'm merely saying
that putting a large chunk of useful-only-at-execution-time code into
backend/parser is the Wrong Thing.
regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: