On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 9:46 AM, Jeevan Chalke <jeevan.cha...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > Hmm.. you are right. Done.
I don't see a reason to hold off on committing 0002 and 0003, so I've done that now; since they are closely related changes, I pushed them as a single commit. It probably could've just been included in the main patch, but it's fine. I don't much like the code that 0001 refactors and am not keen to propagate it into more places. I've separately proposed patches to restructure that code in http://postgr.es/m/ca+tgmoakt5gmahbpwgqrr2nadfomaonoxyowhrdvfgws34t...@mail.gmail.com and if we end up deciding to adopt that approach then I think this patch will also need to create rels for UPPERREL_TLIST. I suspect that approach would also remove the need for 0004, as that case would also end up being handled in a different way. However, the jury is still out on whether or not the approach I've proposed there is any good. Feel free to opine over on that thread. I'm going to go spend some time looking at 0005 next. It looks to me like it's generally going in a very promising direction, but I need to study the details more. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
