On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 9:14 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 12:47 PM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.m...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 12:00 PM Greg Nancarrow <gregn4...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > Another comment on the 0001 patch: as there is now a mix of setting > > > "apply_error_callback_arg" members directly and also through inline > > > functions, it might look better to have it done consistently with > > > functions having prototypes something like the following: > > > > > > static inline void set_apply_error_context_rel(LogicalRepRelMapEntry > > > *rel); > > > static inline void reset_apply_error_context_rel(void); > > > static inline void set_apply_error_context_attnum(int remote_attnum); > > > > It might look consistent, but if we do that, we will end up needing > > functions every field to update when we add new fields to the struct > > in the future? > > > > Yeah, I also think it is too much, but we can add comments where ever > we set the information for error callback. I see it is missing when > the patch is setting remote_attnum, see similar other places and add > comments if already not there.
Agred. Will add comments in the next version patch. Regards, -- Masahiko Sawada EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com/
