On Tue, Jul 2, 2024 at 10:59 AM Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Shubham,
>
> As you can see, most of my recent review comments for patch 0001 are
> only cosmetic nitpicks. But, there is still one long-unanswered design
> question from a month ago [1, #G.2]
>
> A lot of the patch code of pgoutput.c and proto.c and logicalproto.h
> is related to the introduction and passing everywhere of new
> 'include_generated_columns' function parameters. These same functions
> are also always passing "BitMapSet *columns" representing the
> publication column list.
>
> My question was about whether we can't make use of the existing BMS
> parameter instead of introducing all the new API parameters.
>
> The idea might go something like this:
>
> * If 'include_generated_columns' option is specified true and if no
> column list was already specified then perhaps the relentry->columns
> can be used for a "dummy" column list that has everything including
> all the generated columns.
>
> * By doing this:
> -- you may be able to avoid passing the extra
> 'include_gernated_columns' everywhere
> -- you may be able to avoid checking for generated columns deeper in
> the code (since it is already checked up-front when building the
> column list BMS)
>
> ~~
>
> I'm not saying this design idea is guaranteed to work, but it might be
> worth considering, because if it does work then there is potential to
> make the current 0001 patch significantly shorter.
>
> ======
> [1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAHut%2BPsuJfcaeg6zst%3D6PE5uyJv_UxVRHU3ck7W2aHb1uQYKng%40mail.gmail.com
I have fixed this issue in the latest Patches.
Please refer to the updated v15 Patches here in [1]. See [1] for the
changes added.
[1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAHv8Rj%2B%3Dhn--ALJQvzzu7meX3LuO3tJKppDS7eO1BGvNFYBAbg%40mail.gmail.com
Thanks and Regards,
Shubham Khanna.