pg.ddx.io  pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org mailing list archive  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: Etsuro Fujita <etsuro.fujita@gmail.com>
Cc: Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>
Cc: Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>
Cc: David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Cc: amitdkhan.pg@gmail.com
Subject: Re: partition routing layering in nodeModifyTable.c
Date: Sat, 03 Aug 2019 13:48:01 -0400
Message-ID: <18542.1564854481@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190803173236.dz6uzqat6cscymi4@alap3.anarazel.de>
References: <20190718055334.4arwrufbhe7zcsjx@alap3.anarazel.de>
	<CA+HiwqEgZhHWPFg-S5Kw8z0O-1X3dzfJomHjGL74X-Vw0wT2BQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+HiwqEUgb5RdUgxR7Sqco4S09jzJstHiaT2vnCRPGR4JCAPqA@mail.gmail.com>
	<20190719165241.nblajgpf5ys2q5sh@alap3.anarazel.de>
	<CA+HiwqFDGhGT8AXUQ4S5ytzuLNm18Qbu1js7XG3eYk5h-zhxmw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+HiwqGm8gLMv37gT1GgSMdJKS8CW9=G1xV=SqQVAVNARqxSFw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20190802180138.64zcircokw2upaho@alap3.anarazel.de>
	<CAPmGK17a0kaRBVutsbyUKLSGd=gummvhkYzJhTL5YiNO6BEK_g@mail.gmail.com>
	<20190802203059.btgvsmi7nk2zrtdw@alap3.anarazel.de>
	<CAPmGK16M1C4DBcRr1Pj+e5bN4GtqUc8US7jUwC+WEi5JzpQOvQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<20190803173236.dz6uzqat6cscymi4@alap3.anarazel.de>

Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> On 2019-08-03 19:41:55 +0900, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
>> What API does that function break?

> You need to call it, whereas previously you did not need to call it. The
> effort to change an FDW to get one more parameter, or to call that
> function is about the same.

If those are the choices, adding a parameter is clearly the preferable
solution, because it makes the API breakage obvious at compile.

Adding a function would make sense, perhaps, if only a minority of FDWs
need to do so.  It'd still be risky if the need to do so could be missed
in light testing.

			regards, tom lane





view thread (84+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <18542.1564854481@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Permalink:  ../18542.1564854481@sss.pgh.pa.us/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/18542.1564854481@sss.pgh.pa.us

 · 

reply
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, andres@anarazel.de, etsuro.fujita@gmail.com, amitlangote09@gmail.com, thomas.munro@gmail.com, david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com, robertmhaas@gmail.com, alvherre@2ndquadrant.com, fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp, amitdkhan.pg@gmail.com
  Subject: Re: partition routing layering in nodeModifyTable.c
  In-Reply-To: <18542.1564854481@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