RE: Adding a LogicalRepWorker type field

On Friday, August 18, 2023 11:20 AM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Aug 14, 2023 at 12:08 PM Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
> >
> > The main patch for adding the worker type enum has been pushed [1].
> >
> > Here is the remaining (rebased) patch for changing some previous
> > cascading if/else to switch on the LogicalRepWorkerType enum instead.
> >
>
> I see this as being useful if we plan to add more worker types. Does anyone else
> see this remaining patch as an improvement?

+1

I have one comment for the new error message.

+ case WORKERTYPE_UNKNOWN:
+ ereport(ERROR, errmsg_internal("should_apply_changes_for_rel: Unknown worker type"));

I think reporting an ERROR in this case is fine. However, I would suggest
refraining from mentioning the function name in the error message, as
recommended in the error style document [1]. Also, it appears we could use
elog() here.

[1] https://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/error-style-guide.html

Best Regards,
Hou zj