On Wed, Mar 6, 2024 at 11:22 PM Amul Sul <sula...@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
