Re: pgsql: Remove BufFile's isTemp flag.
От | Andres Freund |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pgsql: Remove BufFile's isTemp flag. |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20171120000615.36f32ayw67xyy3h6@alap3.anarazel.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pgsql: Remove BufFile's isTemp flag. (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: pgsql: Remove BufFile's isTemp flag.
Re: pgsql: Remove BufFile's isTemp flag. |
Список | pgsql-committers |
On 2017-11-19 17:00:36 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com> writes: > >> On 2017-11-17 11:23:54 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > >>> I wonder whether we should then rename BufFileCreateTemp to just > >>> BufFileCreate, since it's no longer possible to have a BufFile that > >>> isn't temp. > > > Here's a patch that does those things. I'm slightly surprised by the > > renaming suggestion though, because it means that an extension that > > uses BufFile will need to know how to select the v10 and v11 function > > name as appropriate. Would you backpatch redirect support for the new > > name to older versions? > > No, but if you're concerned about it, we could maintain API compatibility > for extensions with something like > > #define BufFileCreateTemp(interXact) BufFileCreate(interXact) I don't really see a point in doing this renaming in the first place. It's not like the Temp suffix has become inaccurate. I'd perhaps not add it in the green field, but I don't see a need to change an existing function name. If anything it seems confusing because you'd miss something when trivially searching the history / comparing branches. Greetings, Andres Freund
В списке pgsql-committers по дате отправления: