Re: Refactoring: Use soft error reporting for *_opt_error functions
amul sul <sulamul@gmail.com>
From: Amul Sul <sulamul@gmail.com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2025-09-02T07:10:25Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Commits
Same data as JSON:
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Fix two comments in numeric.c
- 0c7f10302820 19 (unreleased) landed
-
Switch some numeric-related functions to use soft error reporting
- 4246a977bad6 19 (unreleased) landed
-
Change pg_lsn_in_internal() to use soft error reporting
- ae453120085f 19 (unreleased) landed
On Tue, Sep 2, 2025 at 9:46 AM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 01, 2025 at 12:21:18PM +0100, Dean Rasheed wrote: > > On Mon, 1 Sept 2025 at 10:36, Amul Sul <sulamul@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I believe we should update all *_opt_error functions to use the new > >> soft error reporting infrastructure instead of boolean flags -- did > >> the same in the attached patch. I am not sure if this patch should be > >> part of that thread[1]. It's a significant improvement in itself, as > >> it would make the code more compact and consistent. > > Handling that as a separate patch seems OK here. Thanks for caring. > > > Agreed. That does look neater. > > Yep. More consistent. > > +/* forward declarations to avoid node.h include */ > +typedef struct Node Node; > > s/declarations/declaration/. Singular required, only one declaration. > Ok, will fix that. > Looking at the surroundings, would it make sense to do the same for > pg_lsn_in_internal()? It requires a safe fallback when parsing the > LSN from the recovery_target_lsn GUC. Yeah, it makes sense, will change in the next version. Just a quick question regarding the naming conventions. It looks like we have a choice between two options for consistency. Should we rename the pg_lsn_in_internal function by replacing "_internal" with "_safe", or should we rename all of the *_opt_error functions by replacing "_opt_error" with "_internal"? I would choose the latter option. Regards, Amul