From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | John Naylor <jcnaylor(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Experimental patch: generating BKI revisited |
Date: | 2009-11-13 13:16:13 |
Message-ID: | 20091113131612.GB4459@alvh.no-ip.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
John Naylor escribió:
> Hello everyone,
>
> I was quite intrigued by a discussion that happened this past summer
> regarding generation of bootstrap files such as postgres.bki, and the
> associated pain points of maintaining the DATA() statements in catalog headers.
> It occurred to me that the current system is backwards: Instead of
> generating the
> bootstrap files from hard-coded strings contained in various header files, it
> seems it would be a cleaner design to generate both from a human-readable
> high-level description of the system catalogs.
I had a look at this some time ago and I must admit that I find it
pretty interesting. The technology choices make it
obviously impossible to merge -- not only the particular Perl modules
used, but the mere fact that Perl is used (and that such a recent
version is required). But you're already aware of all this so I'm not
going to say more.
As far as the data file is concerned, I think having it all in a single
file is a loser. I'd go for a file per catalog. Also, I don't like the
fact that the column descriptions are lost because of being in a
YAML comment. I think it'd be better if the generated pg_foo.h files
had them.
One thing I loved about this is that it's trivial to add a column to
pg_proc and that this not mean that I have to edit almost every single
line of the damn monster file.
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Merlin Moncure | 2009-11-13 13:16:16 | Re: Listen / Notify rewrite |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2009-11-13 12:14:37 | Re: CommitFest 2009-09, two weeks on |