Rename nodes/relation.h => nodes/pathnodes.h ?

On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 12:18 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:

In the pluggable-storage discussion, there was some talk of renaming
nodes/relation.h to avoid confusion with the new access/relation.h
header. I think this is a fine idea, not only because of that conflict
but because "relation.h" has never made a lot of sense as the file's
name.

After a bit of thought, I propose "pathnodes.h" as the new name.
That fits in with the other major headers in that directory
(primnodes.h, parsenodes.h, plannodes.h, execnodes.h), and it seems
like a reasonable summary of what's in it. Admittedly, Path nodes
as such are barely a third of the file's bulk; but I don't see any
equally pithy way to describe the rest of it, unless something like
planner_data.h, which is pretty unmelodious.

optnodes.h, as in optimization-related nodes? I like pathnodes.h too though.

Thanks,
Amit

On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 10:18 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:

In the pluggable-storage discussion, there was some talk of renaming
nodes/relation.h to avoid confusion with the new access/relation.h
header. I think this is a fine idea, not only because of that conflict
but because "relation.h" has never made a lot of sense as the file's
name.

+1.

After a bit of thought, I propose "pathnodes.h" as the new name.
That fits in with the other major headers in that directory
(primnodes.h, parsenodes.h, plannodes.h, execnodes.h), and it seems
like a reasonable summary of what's in it. Admittedly, Path nodes
as such are barely a third of the file's bulk; but I don't see any
equally pithy way to describe the rest of it, unless something like
planner_data.h, which is pretty unmelodious.

Yeah, it's not perfect, but it's better than what we've got now.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

On 2019-Jan-28, Tom Lane wrote:

(There was some mention of trying to split relation.h into multiple
files, but I fail to see any advantage in that.)

Hmm, nodes/relation.h includes lots of other files and is widely
included. If we can split it usefully, I vote for that. However, I
failed to find any concrete proposal for doing that. I don't have one
ATM but I'd like to keep the door open for it happening at some point.

I do like planner/pathnodes.h as a name, FWIW.

--
�lvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> writes:

On 2019-Jan-28, Tom Lane wrote:

(There was some mention of trying to split relation.h into multiple
files, but I fail to see any advantage in that.)

Hmm, nodes/relation.h includes lots of other files and is widely
included.

Yup, that's why I'm trying to reduce the number of files that include it,
over in the other thread.

If we can split it usefully, I vote for that. However, I
failed to find any concrete proposal for doing that. I don't have one
ATM but I'd like to keep the door open for it happening at some point.

The door's always open, of course, but I don't see any point in waiting
around for a hypothetical redesign.

I do like planner/pathnodes.h as a name, FWIW.

Yeah, I think I'll go with pathnodes.h. We'd probably keep using that
for the Path node typedefs themselves, even if somebody comes up with
a design for splitting out other things.

regards, tom lane

Hi,

On 2019-01-29 10:31:39 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> writes:

On 2019-Jan-28, Tom Lane wrote:
I do like planner/pathnodes.h as a name, FWIW.

Yeah, I think I'll go with pathnodes.h. We'd probably keep using that
for the Path node typedefs themselves, even if somebody comes up with
a design for splitting out other things.

+1

FWIW, I can live with the #ifndef, #define, typedef .. #endif thing, I
just don't think it's pretty.

Greetings,

Andres Freund