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: 2025-09-02T09:11:23Z

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

Attachments

v2-0001-Change-_opt_error-to-soft-error-reporting.patch (application/x-patch) patch v2-0001

On Tue, Sep 2, 2025 at 12:59 PM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 02, 2025 at 12:40:25PM +0530, Amul Sul wrote:
> > 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.
>
> Applying "_safe" seems a bit more consistent to me, as per past
> changes like ccff2d20ed96, also looking at the functions that are
> given a ErrorSaveContext in input.  I am ready to believe that there
> are not a lot of callers of the existing _opt_error() routines listed
> in numeric.h, so a renaming may be better to let existing callers know
> about the change.  These predate the introduction of the "_safe"
> functions, introduced in 16d489b0fe05.

Understood, thanks.

The updated version is attached. In addition to the *_opt_error()
functions, it also renames pg_lsn_in_internal to pg_lsn_in_safe and
incorporates soft error handling.

Regards,
Amul