On Wed, Mar 6, 2024 at 11:22 PM Amul Sul <sulamul@gmail.com> wrote:
>> You are not changing silently the internals of get_controlfile(), so
>> no objections here. The name of the new routine could be shorter, but
>> being short of ideas what you are proposing looks fine by me.
>
> Could be get_controlfile_by_path() ?
It could. I just thought this was clearer. I agree that it's a bit
long, but I don't think this is worth bikeshedding very much. If at a
later time somebody feels strongly that it needs to be changed, so be
it. Right now, getting on with the business at hand is more important,
IMHO.
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com