| From: | Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)kurilemu(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Chao Li <li(dot)evan(dot)chao(at)gmail(dot)com>, "L(dot) pgsql-hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Property graph: fix error handling when dropping non-existent label property |
| Date: | 2026-04-29 12:10:32 |
| Message-ID: | CAExHW5so9k_8RsAs00-rTY+4x9rtuO6cmwy8RG6jZx1PZGVHqQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Apr 29, 2026 at 3:22 PM Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)kurilemu(dot)de> wrote:
>
> On 2026-04-29, Chao Li wrote:
>
> >> Looks good to me. However, I did change OidIsValid() and !OidIsValid()
> >> back to (oid) and (!oid) conditions to be consistent with the rest of
> >> the code.
> >
> > In the file, I also see:
> > ```
> > if (pgrelid == InvalidOid)
> > ```
> >
> > Should we take this opportunity to change to use OidIsValid()
> > everywhere in the file? As this feature is new to PG19, we can cleanup
> > the inconsistency before releasing v19. Otherwise some people might
> > also file a cleanup patch for this in the future.
>
> Yeah, I find "if (oid)" a rather terrible coding pattern. The negative one is perhaps not so bad, but I'd keep both cases similar by using the macro in both, for consistency.
>
I am in favour of doing this change, but let's do it in a separate patch.
--
Best Wishes,
Ashutosh Bapat
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dilip Kumar | 2026-04-29 12:31:37 | Re: Include schema-qualified names in publication error messages. |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2026-04-29 12:10:17 | Re: Support logical replication of DDLs, take2 |