Re: recovery modules
| От | Nathan Bossart |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: recovery modules |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 20230130193820.GB2740781@nathanxps13 обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: recovery modules (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>) |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 04:51:38PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Now, I find this part, where we use a double pointer to allow the
> module initialization to create and give back a private area, rather
> confusing, and I think that this could be bug-prone, as well. Once
> you incorporate some data within the set of callbacks, isn't this
> stuff close to a "state" data, or just something that we could call
> only an "ArchiveModule"? Could it make more sense to have
> _PG_archive_module_init return a structure with everything rather than
> a separate in/out argument? Here is the idea, simply:
> typedef struct ArchiveModule {
> ArchiveCallbacks *routines;
> void *private_data;
> /* Potentially more here, like some flags? */
> } ArchiveModule;
Yeah, we could probably invent an ArchiveModuleContext struct. I think
this is similar to how LogicalDecodingContext is used.
--
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: