Re: Any reason to have heap_(de)formtuple?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Kris Jurka <books(at)ejurka(dot)com>
Cc: Zdenek Kotala <Zdenek(dot)Kotala(at)Sun(dot)COM>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Any reason to have heap_(de)formtuple?
Date: 2008-11-02 01:49:17
Message-ID: 13762.1225590557@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Kris Jurka <books(at)ejurka(dot)com> writes:
> On Thu, 23 Oct 2008, Kris Jurka wrote:
>> The problem with trying to deprecate it is that the vast majority of the
>> backend is still using the old interfaces, so people looking for
>> inspiration for their external modules will likely end up using the old
>> interface. Like Alvaro I started this conversion a while ago, got
>> bored, and forgot about it. If people do want this conversion done while
>> keeping the old interface around, I can track down that patch, update it
>> and finish it up for the next CommitFest.

> Here's a patch that changes everything over to the the new API and
> implements the old API by calling the new API.

Applied with small corrections (I caught a couple of mistakes :-().

I notice that the SPI API is still largely dependent on the 'n'/' '
convention for null flags. Now that there are not so many examples
of that in the core code, I think this poses a threat of serious
confusion for newbie writers of add-on modules. Does anyone want to
look at cleaning that up? I suppose we'd have to do it in much the
same way, adding new parallel functions and deprecating the old ones.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Greg Smith 2008-11-02 02:02:35 Simple postgresql.conf wizard
Previous Message Robert Haas 2008-11-02 01:40:44 Re: Well done, Hackers