Re: ArchiveEntry optional arguments refactoring
От | Dmitry Dolgov |
---|---|
Тема | Re: ArchiveEntry optional arguments refactoring |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+q6zcXG-aL7aw7A4Mp20yMv_OsOW9dESNyUwuPqe0Z02FGoTA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | ArchiveEntry optional arguments refactoring (Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
> On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 1:16 PM Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > During the discussion in [1] an idea about refactoring ArchiveEntry was > suggested. The reason is that currently this function has significant number of > arguments that are "optional", and every change that has to deal with it > introduces a lot of useless diffs. In the thread, mentioned above, such an > example is tracking current table access method, and I guess "Remove WITH OIDS" > commit 578b229718e is also similar. > > Proposed idea is to refactor out all/optional arguments into a separate data > structure, so that adding/removing a new argument wouldn't change that much of > unrelated code. Then for every invocation of ArchiveEntry this structure needs > to be prepared before the call, or as Andres suggested: > > ArchiveEntry((ArchiveArgs){.tablespace = 3, > .dumpFn = somefunc, > ...}); > > Another suggestion from Amit is to have an ArchiveEntry() function with limited > number of parameters, and an ArchiveEntryEx() with those extra parameters which > are not needed in usual cases. > > I want to prepare a patch for that, and I'm inclined to go with the first > option, but since there are two solutions to choose from, I would love to hear > more opinion about this topic. Any pros/cons we don't see yet? > > [1]: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/20180703070645.wchpu5muyto5n647%40alap3.anarazel.de [CC Andres and Amit]
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: