On Sun, Apr 05, 2020 at 08:01:36PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> On Sun, 5 Apr 2020 at 18:45, Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Apr 05, 2020 at 06:08:06PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> > >
> > > Why do we need two rows in the doc? For instance, replication slot
> > > functions have some optional arguments but there is only one row in
> > > the doc. So I think we don't need to change the doc from the previous
> > > version patch.
> > >
> >
> > I thought that if we document the function as pg_check_relation(regclass [,
> > fork]) users could think that the 2nd argument is optional, so that
> > pg_check_relation('something', NULL) could be a valid alias for the 1-argument
> > form, which it isn't. After checking, I see that e.g. current_setting has the
> > same semantics and is documented the way you suggest, so fixed back to previous
> > version.
> >
> > > And I think these are not necessary as we already defined in
> > > include/catalog/pg_proc.dat:
> > >
> > > +CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION pg_check_relation(
> > > + IN relation regclass,
> > > + OUT relid oid, OUT forknum integer, OUT failed_blocknum bigint,
> > > + OUT expected_checksum integer, OUT found_checksum integer)
> > > + RETURNS SETOF record STRICT VOLATILE LANGUAGE internal AS 'pg_check_relation'
> > > + PARALLEL RESTRICTED;
> > > +
> > > +CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION pg_check_relation(
> > > + IN relation regclass, IN fork text,
> > > + OUT relid oid, OUT forknum integer, OUT failed_blocknum bigint,
> > > + OUT expected_checksum integer, OUT found_checksum integer)
> > > + RETURNS SETOF record STRICT VOLATILE LANGUAGE internal
> > > + AS 'pg_check_relation_fork'
> > > + PARALLEL RESTRICTED;
> > >
> >
> > Oh right this isn't required since there's no default value anymore, fixed.
> >
> > v9 attached.
>
> Thank you for updating the patch! The patch looks good to me.
>
> I've marked this patch as Ready for Committer. I hope this patch will
> get committed to PG13.
>
Thanks a lot!