| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk> |
| Cc: | Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers\(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: No longer possible to query catalogs for index capabilities? |
| Date: | 2016-08-09 15:26:29 |
| Message-ID: | 24619.1470756389@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk> writes:
> Where'd be a good place to put that function? ruleutils? catalog/index.c ?
> (ruleutils is way too big already)
Agreed. catalog/index.c is not a place that implements SQL-visible
functions, so I don't like that either.
One idea is utils/adt/misc.c. Or we could make a new file under
utils/adt/ though I'm not very sure what to name it. amaccess.c?
catutils.c? If there's only ever likely to be one or two functions
of this ilk, maybe a new file is overkill and we should just use misc.c.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Vladimir Sitnikov | 2016-08-09 15:42:16 | Re: Slowness of extended protocol |
| Previous Message | Andrew Gierth | 2016-08-09 15:18:10 | Re: No longer possible to query catalogs for index capabilities? |