On Fri, Mar 1, 2024 at 12:08 PM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 29, 2024 at 12:41:38PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > On 27.02.24 08:57, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> >> On 2024-Feb-27, Michael Paquier wrote:
> >>> These would cause compilation failures. Saying that, this is a very
> >>> nice cleanup, so I've fixed these and applied the patch after checking
> >>> that the one-one replacements were correct.
> >>
> >> Oh, I thought we were going to get rid of ObjectClass altogether -- I
> >> mean, have getObjectClass() return ObjectAddress->classId, and then
> >> define the OCLASS values for each catalog OID [... tries to ...] But
> >> this(*) doesn't work for two reasons:
> >
> > I have long wondered what the point of ObjectClass is. I find the extra
> > layer of redirection, which is used only in small parts of the code, and the
> > similarity to ObjectType confusing. I happened to have a draft patch for
> > its removal lying around, so I'll show it here, rebased over what has
> > already been done in this thread.
>
> The elimination of getObjectClass() seems like a good end goal IMO, so
> the direction of the patch is interesting. Would object_type_map and
> ObjectProperty follow the same idea of relying on the catalogs OID
> instead of the OBJECT_*?
>
> Note that there are still two dependencies to getObjectClass() in
> event_trigger.c and dependency.c.
> --
I refactored dependency.c, event_trigger.c based on
0001-Remove-ObjectClass.patch.
dependency.c already includes a bunch of catalog header files, but
event_trigger.c doesn't.
Now we need to "include" around 30 header files in event_trigger.c,
not sure if it's ok or not.
0001-Remove-ObjectClass.patch
We also need to refactor getObjectIdentityParts's below comments?
/*
* There's intentionally no default: case here; we want the
* compiler to warn if a new OCLASS hasn't been handled above.
*/
since OCLASS is removed.
`bool EventTriggerSupportsObjectClass(ObjectClass objclass)`
change to
`bool EventTriggerSupportsObjectClass(Oid classId)`
I think the function name should also be refactored.
I'm not sure of the new function name, so I didn't change.