From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>
cc: pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org,
        John Naylor <john.naylor@enterprisedb.com>
Subject: Re: renumber_oids.pl needs some updates
In-reply-to: <2eab924a-9667-d287-5e84-a3c54d5f433e@enterprisedb.com>
References: <2995325.1650487527@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <2eab924a-9667-d287-5e84-a3c54d5f433e@enterprisedb.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>
	message dated "Wed, 20 Apr 2022 22:56:53 +0200"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <2997790.1650489018.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2022 17:10:18 -0400
Message-ID: <2997791.1650489018@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/2997791.1650489018%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> On 20.04.22 22:45, Tom Lane wrote:
>> The attached proposed patch invents a variant macro
>> DECLARE_TOAST_WITH_MACRO for the relatively small number of cases
>> where we need such OID macros.

> This makes sense.

> A more elaborate (future) project would be to have genbki.pl generate 
> all of IsSharedRelation(), which is the only place these toast-table-OID 
> macros are used, AFAICT.

Perhaps.  We invent shared catalogs at a slow enough rate that I'm
not sure the effort would ever pay for itself in person-hours,
but maybe making such invention a trifle less error-prone is
worth something.

I'd still want to keep this form of DECLARE_TOAST, in case someone
comes up with a different reason to want macro names for toast OIDs.

			regards, tom lane