Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [RFC] Common object property boards

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Kohei Kaigai <Kohei(dot)Kaigai(at)emea(dot)nec(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Kohei KaiGai <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Common object property boards
Date: 2011-07-29 18:38:31
Message-ID: CA+TgmoY7hZWXeTbkRJHPea_GWnwZAyydM8rCk1XbO1Zk8emO2A@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 1:49 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> It would likely be better to not expose the struct type, just individual
> lookup functions.

I'm not sure about that...  I think that's just going to introduce a
lot of excess notation.

>> And, a translation from ObjectType to type name (e.g "table", "type", ...)
>> is helpful to generate error messages.
>
>>   const char *get_object_type_name(ObjectType objtype);
>
> Again, I think this is too low level because of message translation
> considerations.

On this point I agree.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Peter EisentrautDate: 2011-07-29 18:44:15
Subject: Re: include host names in hba error messages
Previous:From: Nikhil SontakkeDate: 2011-07-29 18:12:37
Subject: Re: Check constraints on partition parents only?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group