From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: optimizer/clauses.h needn't include access/htup.h
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2020 17:00:41 -0500
Message-ID: <166715.1606168841@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201123205505.GJ24052@telsasoft.com>
References: <20201123205505.GJ24052@telsasoft.com>
Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com> writes:
> It was only needed between these:
> commit a8677e3ff6bb8ef78a9ba676faa647bba237b1c4
> commit f09346a9c6218dd239fdf3a79a729716c0d305bd
Hm, you're right. Removed.
> I noticed while looking at "what includes what" and wondered if some of these
> are kind of "modularity violations".
Yeah. I've ranted before that we ought to have some clearer idea of
module layering within the backend, and avoid cross-header inclusions
that would break the layering. This particular case didn't really
do so, I suppose, since htup.h would surely be on a lower level than
the optimizer. But it still seems nicer to not have that inclusion.
Anyway, if you're feeling motivated to explore a more wide-ranging
refactoring, by all means have a go at it.
regards, tom lane
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, pryzby@telsasoft.com, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: optimizer/clauses.h needn't include access/htup.h
In-Reply-To: <166715.1606168841@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox