Re: BUG #18960: Mistake in test test_simple_pipeline (libpq_pipeline.c)
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BUG #18960: Mistake in test test_simple_pipeline (libpq_pipeline.c) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 803146.1756910897@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: BUG #18960: Mistake in test test_simple_pipeline (libpq_pipeline.c) (Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@kurilemu.de>) |
Ответы |
Re: BUG #18960: Mistake in test test_simple_pipeline (libpq_pipeline.c)
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
=?utf-8?Q?=C3=81lvaro?= Herrera <alvherre@kurilemu.de> writes: > On 2025-Jun-21, Tom Lane wrote: >> Here's a shot at improving matters. I also made an effort >> at cleaning up memory leaks in libpq_pipeline.c, although >> that's surely neatnik-ism not anything meaningful. > Yeah, the code looks much better this way. I thought it was a bit odd > that a function called confirm_result_status() would actually consume > said status. Would it be better as > consume_result_status(PGconn *conn, ExecStatusType expected) > ? Hm, I chose that name by analogy to the adjacent confirm_query_canceled(), which is likewise consuming a result. I agree that "consume" is a better verb, but then let's rename confirm_query_canceled as well. > I think the patch is a clear improvement regardless. Thanks for reviewing! regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: