On 2021-Jan-20, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > On 2021-Jan-20, Michael Paquier wrote: > > > +/* > > + * This is mostly duplicating ATExecSetTableSpaceNoStorage, > > + * which should maybe be factored out to a library function. > > + */ > > Wouldn't it be better to do first the refactoring of 0002 and then > > 0001 so as REINDEX can use the new routine, instead of putting that > > into a comment? > > I think merging 0001 and 0002 into a single commit is a reasonable > approach.
... except it doesn't make a lot of sense to have set_rel_tablespace in either indexcmds.c or index.c. I think tablecmds.c is a better place for it. (I would have thought catalog/storage.c, but that one's not the right abstraction level it seems.) But surely ATExecSetTableSpaceNoStorage should be using this new routine. (I first thought 0002 was doing that, since that commit is calling itself a "refactoring", but now that I look closer, it's not.) -- Álvaro Herrera 39°49'30"S 73°17'W "On the other flipper, one wrong move and we're Fatal Exceptions" (T.U.X.: Term Unit X - http://www.thelinuxreview.com/TUX/)
