Re: patch for parallel pg_dump
| От | Joachim Wieland | 
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: patch for parallel pg_dump | 
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CACw0+13q+XXz=Q18fLThQ2a6arPj7VVLDxuFGBpfLmGO5eQ3UA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст  | 
		
| Ответ на | Re: patch for parallel pg_dump (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) | 
| Ответы | 
                	
            		Re: patch for parallel pg_dump
            		
            		 | 
		
| Список | pgsql-hackers | 
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 4:57 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: > But even if you do know that subclassing > is intended, that doesn't prove that the particular Archive object is > always going to be an ArchiveHandle under the hood. If it is, why not > just pass it as an ArchiveHandle to begin with? I know that you took back some of your comments, but I'm with you here. Archive is allocated as an ArchiveHandle and then casted back to Archive*, so you always know that an Archive is an ArchiveHandle. I'm all for getting rid of Archive and just using ArchiveHandle throughout pg_dump which would get rid of these useless casts. I admit that I might have made it a bit worse by adding a few more of these casts but the fundamental issue was already there and there is precedence for casting between them in both directions :-) Joachim
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: