Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> Some of the refactoring you've done here seems likely to break things,
> because you're basically making the relation locking happen later than
> it does not, and that's going to cause problems.
> get_object_address_relobject() is a particularly egregious
> rearrangement. It seems to me that the right formula is to call
> relation_openrv() if missing_ok is false, and try_relation_openrv() if
> missing_ok is true. But that's sort of a pain, so I propose to first
> apply the attached patch, which gets rid of try_relation_openrv() and
> try_heap_openrv() and instead adds a missing_ok argument to
> relation_openrv() and heap_openrv(). If we do this, then the
> missing_ok argument can just be passed through all the way down.
> Thoughts? Comments? Objections?
At least the last hunk (in pltcl.c) seems to have the flag backwards.
regards, tom lane