| From: | Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: partitioning code reorganization |
| Date: | 2018-04-14 14:48:05 |
| Message-ID: | CA+HiwqHyOjNkZeAEFeNSaSoASSPjRaH-G-w-t5p0F=CoFG3Vdg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi.
Thanks for taking care of few things I left like those PartitionKey
accessors in rel.h.
On Sat, Apr 14, 2018 at 8:51 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> wrote:
> Here's a final version.
>
> The one thing I don't like about this is having put
> PartitionRangeDatumKind in partdefs.h, which forces us to #include that
> file in parsenodes.h. I had to do this in order to avoid #including
> parsenodes.h in partbounds.h. Now maybe that is not so bad, since that
> file isn't *that* widely used anyway; it wouldn't cause any unnecessary
> bleeding of parsenodes.h into any other headers. So maybe I'll put the
> enum back in parsenodes. Any opinions on that?
I'm fine with keeping it where it was, that is, parsenodes.h. I can
see that parsenodes.h is pretty heavily included in other headers
anyway.
Also, +1 to moving compute_hash_value() and satisfies_hash_partition()
to partbounds.c.
Thanks,
Amit
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David Arnold | 2018-04-14 15:27:58 | Re: Proposal: Adding json logging |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2018-04-14 13:58:55 | Re: missing support of named convention for procedures |