From: | Amul Sul <sulamul(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
Cc: | Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Refactoring: Use soft error reporting for *_opt_error functions |
Date: | 2025-09-02 09:11:23 |
Message-ID: | CAAJ_b97_czR0Cz-WTtkF45hFdJHbbeg08kbOGEm3htiscKNN4w@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Sep 2, 2025 at 12:59 PM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 02, 2025 at 12:40:25PM +0530, Amul Sul wrote:
> > Just a quick question regarding the naming conventions. It looks like
> > we have a choice between two options for consistency. Should we rename
> > the pg_lsn_in_internal function by replacing "_internal" with "_safe",
> > or should we rename all of the *_opt_error functions by replacing
> > "_opt_error" with "_internal"?
> >
> > I would choose the latter option.
>
> Applying "_safe" seems a bit more consistent to me, as per past
> changes like ccff2d20ed96, also looking at the functions that are
> given a ErrorSaveContext in input. I am ready to believe that there
> are not a lot of callers of the existing _opt_error() routines listed
> in numeric.h, so a renaming may be better to let existing callers know
> about the change. These predate the introduction of the "_safe"
> functions, introduced in 16d489b0fe05.
Understood, thanks.
The updated version is attached. In addition to the *_opt_error()
functions, it also renames pg_lsn_in_internal to pg_lsn_in_safe and
incorporates soft error handling.
Regards,
Amul
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
v2-0001-Change-_opt_error-to-soft-error-reporting.patch | application/x-patch | 31.8 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | shveta malik | 2025-09-02 10:00:21 | Re: Conflict detection for update_deleted in logical replication |
Previous Message | Julien Rouhaud | 2025-09-02 09:02:41 | Re: Extension security improvement: Add support for extensions with an owned schema |