Re: [HACKERS] Macros bundling RELKIND_* conditions

On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 11:37 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
wrote:

> On 2017-Aug-02, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> > I think Peter's got the error and the detail backwards. It should be
> > more like
> >
> > ERROR: "someview" cannot have constraints
> > DETAIL: "someview" is a view.
> >
> > If we do it like that, we need one ERROR message per error reason,
> > and one DETAIL per relkind, which should be manageable.
>
> I support this idea. Here's a proof-of-concept patch that corresponds
> to one of the cases that Ashutosh was on about (specifically, the one
> that uses the RELKIND_CAN_HAVE_STORAGE macro I just added). If there
> are no objections to this approach, I'm going to complete it along these
> lines.
>
> I put the new function at the bottom of heapam.c but I think it probably
> needs a better place.
>
> BTW are there other opinions on the RELKIND_HAS_STORAGE vs.
> RELKIND_CAN_HAVE_STORAGE debate? I'm inclined to change it to the
> former.
>

+1 I liked the idea.

--
Best Wishes,
Ashutosh Bapat