Re: Replacing pg_depend PIN entries with a fixed range check
От | John Naylor |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Replacing pg_depend PIN entries with a fixed range check |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAFBsxsG+bhcN1pCiEf_trU7w31AbN+OpdGZmKUrNaN3ZJr8qoQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Replacing pg_depend PIN entries with a fixed range check (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Replacing pg_depend PIN entries with a fixed range check
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 6:53 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Attached is a rebase over a4390abec.
> Attached is a rebase over a4390abec.
Looks good to me overall, I just had a couple questions/comments:
isObjectPinned and isSharedObjectPinned are now thin wrappers around IsPinnedObject. Is keeping those functions a matter of future-proofing in case something needs to be handled differently someday, or reducing unnecessary code churn?
setup_depend now doesn't really need to execute any SQL (unless third-party forks have extra steps here?), and could be replaced with a direct call to StopGeneratingPinnedObjectIds. That's a bit more self-documenting, and that would allow shortening this comment:
/*
* Note that no objects created after setup_depend() will be "pinned".
* They are all droppable at the whim of the DBA.
*/
* Note that no objects created after setup_depend() will be "pinned".
* They are all droppable at the whim of the DBA.
*/
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: