Re: Propagate sanity checks of ProcessUtility() to standard_ProcessUtility()?

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: jian he <jian(dot)universality(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Propagate sanity checks of ProcessUtility() to standard_ProcessUtility()?
Date: 2024-03-01 02:05:27
Message-ID: ZeE35_P5dXCm7u_m@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Feb 29, 2024 at 04:10:26PM +0800, jian he wrote:
> why not just shovel these to standard_ProcessUtility.
> so ProcessUtility will looking consistent with (in format)
> * ExecutorStart()
> * ExecutorRun()
> * ExecutorFinish()
> * ExecutorEnd()

That's one of the points of the change: checking that only in
standard_ProcessUtility() may not be sufficient for utility hooks that
don't call standard_ProcessUtility(), so you'd stil want one in
ProcessUtility().
--
Michael

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu) 2024-03-01 02:17:26 RE: Synchronizing slots from primary to standby
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2024-03-01 02:02:01 Re: Injection points: some tools to wait and wake