Re: [PATCH] ternary reloption type - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Nikolay Shaplov
Subject Re: [PATCH] ternary reloption type
Date
Msg-id 4047390.3Lj2Plt8kZ@thinkpad-pgpro
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [PATCH] ternary reloption type  (Timur Magomedov <t.magomedov@postgrespro.ru>)
List pgsql-hackers
В письме от пятница, 12 сентября 2025 г. 16:46:19 MSK пользователь Timur
Magomedov написал:
> Hello Nikolay!
>
> Found a typo in reloptions.h, treaed -> treated.
Oups. Fixed that in the attached version.

> Can ternary enum be added in a separate header file, say,
> src/include/ternary.h instead of adding it to c.h? I'm just not sure if
> c.h is it the right place for relation-options-specific code.
> Of course, I can be wrong.

I am not sure either. But my guess is that spamming into c.h is lesser crime
then adding another useless header file.

Moreover, ternary value is not relation-options-specific, it is actually
relation specific, if you think about it thoroughly. Relation code uses it, and
there is no way to avoid that.

Are there any other notions about the code?

I tried to make thongs more neat and more consistent here. Did I succeed?

--
Nikolay Shaplov aka Nataraj
Fuzzing Engineer at Postgres Professional
Matrix IM: @dhyan:nataraj.su

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Dilip Kumar
Date:
Subject: Re: Incorrect logic in XLogNeedsFlush()
Next
From: Konstantin Knizhnik
Date:
Subject: Re: Orphan page in _bt_split