Excerpts from Nikhil Sontakke's message of jue ago 04 04:23:59 -0400 2011: > Some nit-picking. > > AFAICS above, we seem to be only using 'tbinfo' to identify the object > type here - 'table' visavis 'domain'. We could probably reduce the > above two elses to a single one and use the check of tbinfo being not > null to decide which object type name to spit out..
Yeah, I considered that, but I rejected the idea on the grounds that all the preceding blocks use this style. (Also, if I understand you well, what you suggest would incur into a translatability problem; we'd have to create two separate messages for that purpose anyway.) > Although, it's difficult to see how we could end up marking NOT NULL > constraints as 'separate' ever. So this code will be rarely exercised, > if ever IMO. Well, as Dean points out, as soon as we have NOT VALID constraints it will be necessary. I prefer to leave that out for a later patch. Thanks for looking. -- Álvaro Herrera <alvhe...@commandprompt.com> The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
