Re: Consistently use the XLogRecPtrIsInvalid() macro

Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot.pg@gmail.com>

From: Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot.pg@gmail.com>
To: Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@kurilemu.de>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>, Quan Zongliang <quanzongliang@yeah.net>, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Date: 2025-11-03T07:47:28Z
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 →
  1. Replace literal 0 with InvalidXLogRecPtr for XLogRecPtr assignments

  2. Replace pointer comparisons and assignments to literal zero with NULL

  3. Use XLogRecPtrIsValid() in various places

  4. Introduce XLogRecPtrIsValid()

Attachments

Hi,

On Fri, Oct 31, 2025 at 01:19:50PM +0100, Álvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2025-Oct-31, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:
> 
> > After giving it more thought, I'm inclined to postpone the compiler warning
> > until XLogRecPtrIsValid() has been available for some time. The question is for
> > how long?
> 
> Maybe we can mark it so that it becomes obsolete in a future version,
> 
> #if PG_VERSION_NUM >= 210000 
> [[obsolete]]
> #endif
> XLogRecPtrIsInvalid( .. )
> 
> so that people using it today won't get any noise, but once they do get
> the warning, the versions without the other macro are already out of
> support, so they can switch to the new one easily.  (This presupposes
> that we'd add the new macro to older branches as well, which shouldn't
> be a problem.)  Only extensions wishing to support PG versions older
> than we support would have to work slightly harder, but that should be OK.

Yeah, I did not think of checking PG_VERSION_NUM for a "future" version, that's
a good idea! I did it that way in the attached (in 0002) and introduced
PG_DEPRECATED() (as suggested by Peter upthread).

The version check is done on 24 to ensure that the new macro is available on all
the supported major versions.

The PG_DEPRECATED() name and location (c.h) look fine to me but maybe there is
better suggestions.

I think the way it is done in the attached makes sense, it:

- introduces PG_DEPRECATED()
- provides a use case on how to use it (i.e using a version that is currently
in the future)
- ensures that XLogRecPtrIsInvalid() deprecation is "enforced" as of version 24
- ensures that not using XLogRecPtrIsInvalid() is documented (so that it should
not be used anymore, at least in core, even waiting for version 24)

Regards,

-- 
Bertrand Drouvot
PostgreSQL Contributors Team
RDS Open Source Databases
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com