Re: dealing with extension dependencies that aren't quite 'e'

At 2016-03-24 22:48:51 +0530, ams(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com wrote:
>
> > I think I would like to see code implement both alternatives to see
> > which one is least ugly. Maybe a third idea will manifest itself
> > upon seeing those.
>
> Here's the first one. ExecAlterObjectDependsStmt() looks like this:

Here's the second one, which is only slightly different from the first.
ExecAlterObjectDependsStmt() now looks like this:

+ObjectAddress
+ExecAlterObjectDependsStmt(AlterObjectDependsStmt *stmt)
+{
+ ObjectAddress address;
+ ObjectAddress extAddr;
+ Relation rel = NULL;
+
+ address = get_object_address_rv(stmt->objectType, stmt->relation, stmt->objname,
+ stmt->objargs, &rel, AccessExclusiveLock, false);
+
+ if (rel)
+ heap_close(rel, NoLock);
+
+ extAddr = get_object_address(OBJECT_EXTENSION, stmt->extname, NULL,
+ &rel, AccessExclusiveLock, false);
+
+ recordDependencyOn(&address, &extAddr, DEPENDENCY_AUTO_EXTENSION);
+
+ return address;
+}

And the new get_object_address_rv() looks like this:

+ObjectAddress
+get_object_address_rv(ObjectType objtype, RangeVar *rel, List *objname,
+ List *objargs, Relation *relp, LOCKMODE lockmode,
+ bool missing_ok)
+{
+ if (rel)
+ {
+ objname = lcons(makeString(rel->relname), objname);
+ if (rel->schemaname)
+ objname = lcons(makeString(rel->schemaname), objname);
+ if (rel->catalogname)
+ objname = lcons(makeString(rel->catalogname), objname);
+ }
+
+ return get_object_address(objtype, objname, objargs,
+ relp, lockmode, missing_ok);
+}

Complete patch attached for reference, as before. (I know I haven't
documented the function. I will go through the code to see if there are
any other potential callers, but I wanted to share what I had already.)

-- Abhijit