Horton

Re: GetSubscriptionRelations declares too many scan keys

Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com>
Cc: Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com>, Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2021-05-10T14:14:08Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com> writes:
> On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 07:09:29PM +1000, Peter Smith wrote:
>> Please search PG source code for "ScanData skey[1];" - there are
>> dozens of precedents where other people felt the same as me for
>> declaring single keys.

> AFAICT there are 73 occurences vs 62 of the "Scandata skey;".  I don't think
> there's a huge consensus for one over the other.

Yeah, there's no real consensus about that.  But in this case there's
a strong reason to use skey[1]: it makes the patch a very safe one-liner.
To convert to the other pattern would require touching more code.

			regards, tom lane

Commits

  1. Simplify one use of ScanKey in pg_subscription.c

  2. Logical replication support for initial data copy