Re: Small fix on query_id_enabled

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Yugo NAGATA <nagata(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Small fix on query_id_enabled
Date: 2024-02-10 01:19:15
Message-ID: ZcbPEzo3hjSgl8S2@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Feb 09, 2024 at 04:37:23PM +0800, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 09, 2024 at 03:38:23PM +0900, Yugo NAGATA wrote:
>> Also, I think the name is a bit confusing for the same reason, that is,
>> query_id_enabled may be false even when query id is computed in fact.
>>
>> Actually, this does not matter because we use IsQueryIdEnabled to check
>> if query id is enabled, instead of referring to a global variable
>> (query_id_enabled or compute_query_id). But, just for making a code a bit
>> more readable, how about renaming this to query_id_required which seems to
>> stand for the meaning more correctly?
>
> -1 for renaming to avoid breaking extensions that might access it. We should
> simply document for compute_query_id and query_id_enabled declaration that one
> should instead use IsQueryIdEnabled() if they're interested in whether the core
> queryid are computed or not.

Agreed. A renaming would involve more pain than gain. Improving the
comments around how to all that would be good enough, my 2c.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Soumyadeep Chakraborty 2024-02-10 01:56:19 Re: "ERROR: latch already owned" on gharial
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2024-02-10 01:02:25 Re: Make COPY format extendable: Extract COPY TO format implementations