Re: [PATCH] Slight improvement of worker_spi.c example

From: Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander(at)timescale(dot)com>
To: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Cc: Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Slight improvement of worker_spi.c example
Date: 2023-06-03 12:34:30
Message-ID: CAJ7c6TMsQw2UJCPu9w_SqPdc2+eH7+e=Rj1iQ2+bi9VMaeEQpg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

> That being said this module is really naive and has so many problems that I
> don't think it's actually helpful as coding guidelines for anyone who wants to
> create a non toy extension using bgworkers.

Agree. It is a simple example and I don't think it's going to be
useful to make a complicated one out of it.

The order of the calls it currently uses however may be extremely
confusing for newcomers. It creates an impression that this particular
order is extremely important while in fact it's not and it takes time
to figure this out.

--
Best regards,
Aleksander Alekseev

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ranier Vilela 2023-06-03 12:46:04 Re: Avoid unused value (src/fe_utils/print.c)
Previous Message Julien Rouhaud 2023-06-03 12:28:03 Re: [PATCH] Slight improvement of worker_spi.c example