On Wed, Apr 03, 2024 at 04:20:39PM +0300, Melih Mutlu wrote: > Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz>, 14 Şub 2024 Çar, 10:23 tarihinde > şunu yazdı: >> I was reading the patch, and using int[] as a representation of the >> path of context IDs up to the top-most parent looks a bit strange to >> me, with the relationship between each parent -> child being >> preserved, visibly, based on the order of the elements in this array >> made of temporary IDs compiled on-the-fly during the function >> execution. Am I the only one finding that a bit strange? Could it be >> better to use a different data type for this path and perhaps switch >> to the names of the contexts involved? > > Do you find having the path column strange all together? Or only using > temporary IDs to generate that column? The reason why I avoid using context > names is because there can be multiple contexts with the same name. This > makes it difficult to figure out which context, among those with that > particular name, is actually included in the path. I couldn't find any > other information that is unique to each context.
I've been re-reading the patch again to remember what this is about, and I'm OK with having this "path" column in the catalog. However, I'm somewhat confused by the choice of having a temporary number that shows up in the catalog representation, because this may not be constant across multiple calls so this still requires a follow-up temporary ID <-> name mapping in any SQL querying this catalog. A second thing is that array does not show the hierarchy of the path; the patch relies on the order of the elements in the output array instead. -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
