--On Mittwoch, Juni 08, 2005 14:49:56 -0400 Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
The code seems fairly schizoid about whether the operation is an "alter
namespace" or a "rename". Please be consistent. I'd say it is *not*
a rename, but I suppose you could make an argument the other way ...
No, i totally agree. Well, the Rename* stuff was influenced by my first
shot, that follows the syntax ALTER OBJECT name RENAME SCHEMA TO name....
The locking you are doing is inconsistent with the rest of the backend.
We generally don't hold locks on catalogs longer than necessary.
Okay, needs to be adjusted.
Applying "const" to pointers that point to things that are not const,
as in
+ void
+ ApplyTypeNamespace( Oid typeOid,
+ const Relation rel,
seems to me to be horrible style, even if the compiler lets you do it.
It's too easy to misread it as a promise not to alter the pointed-to
object.
Well, i thought there *should* be a promise, not to alter *rel in that
specific case.
--
Bernd
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
