On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 5:27 AM, Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On 4/10/17 06:18, Ashutosh Bapat wrote: >> This isn't exactly about this particular thread. But I noticed, that >> after we introduced RELKIND_PARTITIONED_TABLE, we required to change a >> number of conditions to include this relkind. We missed some places in >> initial commits and fixed those later. I am wondering whether we >> should creates macros clubbing relevant relkinds together based on the >> purpose of the tests e.g. IS_RELKIND_HAS_STORAGE(). When a new relkind >> is added, one can examine these macros to check whether the new >> relkind fits in the given macro. If all those macros are placed >> together, there is a high chance that we will not miss any place in >> the initial commit itself. > > I think this is worth a try.
Thanks, will try to come up with something ASAP. -- Best Wishes, Ashutosh Bapat EnterpriseDB Corporation The Postgres Database Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers