Re: Rethinking opclass member checks and dependency strength

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: Rethinking opclass member checks and dependency strength
Дата
Msg-id 2023114.1596316622@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Rethinking opclass member checks and dependency strength  (Anastasia Lubennikova <a.lubennikova@postgrespro.ru>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Anastasia Lubennikova <a.lubennikova@postgrespro.ru> writes:
> On 31.03.2020 23:45, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Still haven't got a better naming idea, but in the meantime here's
>> a rebase to fix a conflict with 612a1ab76.

> Maybe "amadjustmembers" will work?

Not having any better idea, I adopted that one.

> I've looked through the patch and noticed this comment:
> +                /* Probably we should throw error here */

> I suggest adding an ERROR or maybe Assert, so that future developers 
> wouldn't
> forget about setting dependencies. Other than that, the patch looks good 
> to me.

I'd figured that adding error checks could be left for a second pass,
but there's no strong reason not to insert these particular checks
now ... and indeed, doing so showed me that the patch hadn't been
updated to cover the recent addition of opclass options procs :-(.
So I fixed that and pushed it.

            regards, tom lane



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Daniel Gustafsson
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: psql - improve test coverage from 41% to 88%
Следующее
От: Daniel Gustafsson
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [PATCH] Btree BackwardScan race condition on Standby during VACUUM