On 2015-10-03 08:27, Amit Kapila wrote:
On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 8:14 PM, Alexander Korotkov
<a.korot...@postgrespro.ru <mailto:a.korot...@postgrespro.ru>> wrote:
 >
 >
 > I agree about staying with one SQL-visible function.


Okay, this does not necessarily mean there should be only one validation function in the C struct though. I wonder if it would be more future proof to name the C interface as something else than the current generic amvalidate. Especially considering that it basically only does opclass validation at the moment (It's IMHO saner in terms of API evolution to expand the struct with more validator functions in the future compared to adding arguments to the existing function).


Few assorted comments:

1.
+  * Get IndexAmRoutine structure from access method oid.
+  */
+ IndexAmRoutine *
+ GetIndexAmRoutine(Oid
amoid)
...
+ if (!RegProcedureIsValid
(amhandler))
+ elog(ERROR, "invalid %u regproc", amhandler);

I have noticed that currently, the above kind of error is reported slightly
differently as in below code:
if (!RegProcedureIsValid(procOid)) \
elog(ERROR, "invalid %s regproc", CppAsString
(pname)); \

If you feel it is better to do the way as it is in current code, then you
can change accordingly.

It's completely different use-case from existing code. And tbh I think it should have completely different and more informative error message something in the style of "index access method %s does not have a handler" (see for example GetFdwRoutineByServerId or transformRangeTableSample how this is handled for similar cases currently).

This however brings another comment - I think it would be better if the GetIndexAmRoutine would be split into two interfaces. The GetIndexAmRoutine itself would accept the amhandler Oid and should just do the OidFunctionCall and then check the result is not NULL and possibly that it is an IndexAmRoutine node. And then all the
(IndexAmRoutine*)DatumGetPointer(!OidFunctionCall0(accessMethodForm->amhandler));
calls in the code should be replaced with calls to the GetIndexAmRoutine instead.

The other routine (let's call it GetIndexAmRoutineByAmId for example) would get IndexAmRoutine from amoid by looking up catalog, doing that validation of amhandler Oid/regproc and calling the GetIndexAmRoutine.


3.
!    Handler function must be written in a compiled language such as C,
using
!    the version-1 interface.

Here, it is not completely clear, what do you refer to as version-1
interface.


This seems to be copy paste from fdw docs, if we decide this should be explained differently then it should be explained differently there as well.

4.
xindex.sgml
<title>Index Methods and Operator Classes</title>
..
It is possible to add a
    new index method by defining the required interface routines and
    then creating a row in <classname>pg_am</classname> &mdash; but that is
    beyond the scope of this chapter (see <xref linkend="indexam">).
   </para>

I think changing above to indicate something about handler function
could be useful.


+1

--
 Petr Jelinek                  http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services


--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Reply via email to