From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Bizarre choice of case for RELKIND_PARTITIONED_TABLE |
Date: | 2017-03-07 23:43:10 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmobWQVuVkO9cRxA7=7kMLaYSUmZb_kS6M7eC+sk0qv8LPA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 6:03 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 12:55 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>> Is there a good reason why RELKIND_PARTITIONED_TABLE is 'P' not 'p'?
>
>> I can't muster a lot of outrage about this one way or another. One
>> possible advantage of 'P' is that there are fewer places where 'P' is
>> mentioned in the source code than 'p'.
>
> Hm, one would hope that the vast majority of code references are neither
> of those, but rather "RELKIND_PARTITIONED_TABLE". information_schema.sql
> and system_views.sql will need to be gone over carefully, certainly, but
> we shouldn't be hard-coding this anywhere that there's a reasonable
> alternative.
For reasons which must've seemed good to whoever instituted the
policy, pg_dump refers to relkinds using the bare letters rather than
the constants.
(And protocol message types don't even have defined constants. Uggh.)
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2017-03-07 23:46:31 | Re: WIP: Faster Expression Processing v4 |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2017-03-07 23:41:05 | Re: Write Ahead Logging for Hash Indexes |