From: | Mark Dilger <mark(dot)dilger(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, John Naylor <john(dot)naylor(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Portal->commandTag as an enum |
Date: | 2020-03-02 22:30:58 |
Message-ID: | 822D4107-5933-451A-B12E-DBED6A915EBD@enterprisedb.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> On Mar 2, 2020, at 1:57 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On 2020-Mar-02, Mark Dilger wrote:
>
>> I think it is more natural to change event trigger code to reason
>> natively about CommandTags rather than continuing to reason about
>> strings. The conversion back-and-forth between the enum and the
>> string representation serves no useful purpose that I can see. But I
>> understand if you are just trying to have the patch change fewer parts
>> of the code, and if you feel more comfortable about reverting that
>> part of the patch, as the committer, I think that's your prerogative.
>
> Nah -- after reading it again, that would make no sense. With the
> change, we're forcing all writers of event trigger functions in C to
> adapt their functions to the new API, but that's okay -- I don't expect
> there will be many, and we're doing other things to the API anyway.
>
> I pushed it now.
Thanks! I greatly appreciate your time.
—
Mark Dilger
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Nikita Glukhov | 2020-03-02 22:33:57 | Re: SQL/JSON: functions |
Previous Message | Tomas Vondra | 2020-03-02 22:05:31 | Re: Allowing ALTER TYPE to change storage strategy |