Package support diffs

From: Bill Studenmund <wrstuden(at)netbsd(dot)org>
To: PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Package support diffs
Date: 2001-10-16 15:05:37
Message-ID: Pine.NEB.4.33.0110160521020.1551-100000@vespasia.home-net.internetconnect.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

are on their way to the patches list. Given the mail delay we've been
seeing, they'll take a while to get there. Oh, it turns out there _is_ a
size limit for patches, so it'll need to get approved.

There are still a few warts in the code.

1) One wart is that I needed to make an identifier for the oid for the
"standard" package. The oid in question is 10, and the identifier is
STANDARDPackageId. I think I will change it to StandardPackageId.

The question I have is in which file should I store the define defining
it?

2) Another problem is dealing with the ambiguity between
relation.attribute and package.functionname. The present code does it by
changing scan.l to recognize ${identifier}\.${identifier}, and if the
first identifier isn't a key word, look to see if it is a package (scan
pg_packages for the name). If so, the scanner returns a different token,
PACKID, than IDENT.

I'll see what I can do about moving all of this into the parser, and
defering the pg_packages scan until later.

I think I got rid of all of the debugging comments; please let me know if
I didn't.

Take care,

Bill

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Flancer 2001-10-16 15:24:12 To Postgres Devs : Wouldn't changing the select limit syntax ....
Previous Message Lee Kindness 2001-10-16 14:25:33 delayed mail?