RE: Initial COPY of Logical Replication is too slow

On Tuesday, March 31, 2026 5:36 PM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2026 at 2:19 PM Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
> >
> > There are many return points, and most of those "if" blocks cannot
> > fall through (they return).
> >
> > I found it slightly difficult to read the code because I kept having
> > to think, "OK, if we reached here, it means pubviaroot must be false,"
> > or "OK, if we reached this far, then puballtables must be false, and
> > pubviaroot must be false," etc.
> >
>
> I can't say exactly why, but I find it difficult to read this function. So, I share
> your concerns about the code of this function.
> Because of its complexity it is difficult to ascertain that the functionality is
> correct or we missed something. Also, considering it is correct today, in its
> current form, it may become difficult to enhance it in future.
>

I attempted to refactor the code a bit based on my preferred style, as shown in
the attachment. While the number of return points couldn't be reduced, I tried
to eliminate if-else branches where possible. Sharing this top-up patch as a
reference for an alternative style that reduces code size.

Best Regards,
Hou zj