Обсуждение: Table AM callbacks referring to heap in declarations (+typos)

Hi all,

While going through the table AM callbacks, I have bumped into a
couple of references to heap.  I think that we should make that more
generic by using the term "table" as done when opening relations and
such.  Attached is a cleanup patch.

While on it, I found a set of typos which looked like a copy-pasto
which got spread => "index_nfo".  I know, these are nits, but I think
that this also reduces the confusion with the way table AM callbacks
are presented to extension developers.

Thanks,
--
Michael

Hi,

On 2019-06-01 15:09:46 -0400, Michael Paquier wrote:
> While going through the table AM callbacks, I have bumped into a
> couple of references to heap.  I think that we should make that more
> generic by using the term "table" as done when opening relations and
> such.  Attached is a cleanup patch.

I'm unbothered by this, but I'm also not opposed to changing this. It's
largely just keeping the previous code / comment.


> While on it, I found a set of typos which looked like a copy-pasto
> which got spread => "index_nfo".

Yea, we should fix this.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

On Sat, Jun 01, 2019 at 12:22:10PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2019-06-01 15:09:46 -0400, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> While going through the table AM callbacks, I have bumped into a
>> couple of references to heap.  I think that we should make that more
>> generic by using the term "table" as done when opening relations and
>> such.  Attached is a cleanup patch.
>
> I'm unbothered by this, but I'm also not opposed to changing this. It's
> largely just keeping the previous code / comment.
>
>> While on it, I found a set of typos which looked like a copy-pasto
>> which got spread => "index_nfo".
>
> Yea, we should fix this.

Thanks.  Do you mind if I fix both then?
--
Michael

On 2019-06-01 15:37:43 -0400, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 01, 2019 at 12:22:10PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2019-06-01 15:09:46 -0400, Michael Paquier wrote:
> >> While going through the table AM callbacks, I have bumped into a
> >> couple of references to heap.  I think that we should make that more
> >> generic by using the term "table" as done when opening relations and
> >> such.  Attached is a cleanup patch.
> > 
> > I'm unbothered by this, but I'm also not opposed to changing this. It's
> > largely just keeping the previous code / comment.
> > 
> >> While on it, I found a set of typos which looked like a copy-pasto
> >> which got spread => "index_nfo".
> > 
> > Yea, we should fix this.
> 
> Thanks.  Do you mind if I fix both then?

I don't mind at all (although it's imo not a fix for the s/heap/table)!

- Andres

On Sat, Jun 01, 2019 at 12:43:11PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> I don't mind at all (although it's imo not a fix for the s/heap/table)!

Thanks, committed what I had.
--
Michael