Re: [Patch] add new parameter to pg_replication_origin_session_setup

From: Doruk Yilmaz <doruk(at)mixrank(dot)com>
To: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com>
Subject: Re: [Patch] add new parameter to pg_replication_origin_session_setup
Date: 2025-09-08 17:22:22
Message-ID: CAMPB6wdPtjbR93oB1XJtYkRtTR64BJG4o5a+0DSSez=puuyuGA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> Then why didn't you specified PARALLEL UNSAFE as well?

You are correct, I missed marking the function as PARALLEL UNSAFE.
I’ve attached a revised patch with the correct annotation.

> BTW, yesterday a new thread started with the same requirement [1]. It
> uses a slightly different way to define the new function. do you have
> any opinion on it?

I don’t think introducing a separate function is a good idea. It’s
effectively the same behavior, technical debt, and maintenance
overhead without a clear benefit.
Our patch keeps a single function with a default parameter, so it’s
not a breaking change. So I believe our approach is preferable.
But I would say that, the fact that another patch is proposing the
same capability indicates there’s broader demand for this change.

Attachment Content-Type Size
v6-0001-pg_replication_origin_session_setup-pid-parameter.patch text/x-patch 5.9 KB

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2025-09-08 17:26:56 Re: magical eref alias names
Previous Message Álvaro Herrera 2025-09-08 17:06:03 Re: Potential problem in commit f777d773878 and 4f7f7b03758