On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 2:14 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > Kohei KaiGai escribió: > >> Function and collation are candidates of this special case handling; >> here are just two kinds of object. >> >> Another idea is to add a function-pointer as argument of >> AlterNamespace_internal for (upcoming) object classes that takes >> special handling for detection of name collision. >> My personal preference is the later one, rather than hardwired >> special case handling. >> However, it may be too elaborate to handle just two exceptions. > > I think this idea is fine. Pass a function pointer which is only > not-NULL for the two exceptional cases; the code should have an Assert > that either the function pointer is passed, or there is a nameCacheId to > use. That way, the object types we already handle in the simpler way do > not get any more complicated than they are today, and we're not forced > to create useless callbacks for objects were the lookup is trivial. The > function pointer should return boolean, true when the function/collation > is already in the given schema; that way, the message wording is only > present in AlterObjectNamespace_internal.
It seems overly complex to me. What's wrong with putting special-case logic directly into the function? That seems cleaner and easier to understand, and there's no real downside AFAICS. We have similar special cases elsewhere; the code can't be simpler than the actual logic. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
