On 2024/08/08 16:36, torikoshia wrote:
Attached patches.
0001 adds new option 'silent' to log_verbosity and 0002 adds on_error and 
log_verbosity options to file_fdw.

Thanks for the patches!

Here are the review comments for 0001 patch.

+      <literal>silent</literal> excludes verbose messages.

This should clarify that in silent mode, not only verbose messages but also
default ones are suppressed?

+               cstate->opts.log_verbosity != COPY_LOG_VERBOSITY_SILENT)

I think using "cstate->opts.log_verbosity >= COPY_LOG_VERBOSITY_DEFAULT" instead
might improve readability.

-       COPY_LOG_VERBOSITY_DEFAULT = 0, /* logs no additional messages, default 
*/
-       COPY_LOG_VERBOSITY_VERBOSE, /* logs additional messages */
+       COPY_LOG_VERBOSITY_SILENT = -1, /* logs none */
+       COPY_LOG_VERBOSITY_DEFAULT = 0, /* logs no additional messages, default 
*/
+       COPY_LOG_VERBOSITY_VERBOSE,     /* logs additional messages */

Why do we need to assign specific numbers like -1 or 0 in this enum definition?


Here are the review comments for 0002 patch.

+                       
pgstat_progress_update_param(PROGRESS_COPY_TUPLES_SKIPPED,
+                                                                               
 ++skipped);

The skipped tuple count isn't accurate because fileIterateForeignScan() resets
"skipped" to 0.

+               if (cstate->opts.on_error != COPY_ON_ERROR_STOP &&
+                       cstate->escontext->error_occurred)
+               {
+                       /*
+                        * Soft error occurred, skip this tuple and deal with 
error
+                        * information according to ON_ERROR.
+                        */
+                       if (cstate->opts.on_error == COPY_ON_ERROR_IGNORE)

If COPY_ON_ERROR_IGNORE indicates tuple skipping, shouldn’t we not only reset
error_occurred but also call "pgstat_progress_update_param" and continue within
this block?

+       for(;;)
+       {

Using "goto" here might improve readability instead of using a "for" loop.

Regards,

--
Fujii Masao
Advanced Computing Technology Center
Research and Development Headquarters
NTT DATA CORPORATION



Reply via email to