Re: mapping object names to role IDs
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: mapping object names to role IDs |
Дата | |
Msg-id | AANLkTim7QyFfVb_ZF5DXJyraLBo38w6E9tj-x6C_jHOo@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: mapping object names to role IDs (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: mapping object names to role IDs
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 1:39 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: >> On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 11:30 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> I think both Stephen and I are saying we don't see merit in that. >>> Moving around pre-existing functions won't accomplish much except >>> causing include-list churn. Let's just standardize the names/APIs >>> and be done. > >> Where do we put the new functions? > > Probably in files that are already concerned with each object type. Not every object type has a file, and the existing functions are split across three different directories, sometimes in files that don't really pertain to the object type being dealt with. I think this is going to be difficult to maintain if we intentionally spread out the parallel code across essentially the entire backend. But I guess I can code it up and we can argue about it then. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: