Re: On login trigger: take three
От | Ted Yu |
---|---|
Тема | Re: On login trigger: take three |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CALte62yFXQvRrA47unpedfcn=GoE_VyvxcKkqj2NUhenK__qgA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: On login trigger: take three (Mikhail Gribkov <youzhick@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Dec 19, 2022 at 1:40 AM Mikhail Gribkov <youzhick@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Ted,> bq. in to the system> 'in to' -> into> bq. Any bugs in a trigger procedure> Any bugs -> Any bugThanks! Fixed typos in the attached v35.> + if (event == EVT_Login)
> + dbgtag = CMDTAG_LOGIN;
> + else
> + dbgtag = CreateCommandTag(parsetree);> The same snippet appears more than once. It seems CMDTAG_LOGIN handling can be moved into `CreateCommandTag`.It appears twice in fact, both cases are nearby: in the main code and under the assert-checking ifdef.
Moving CMDTAG_LOGIN to CreateCommandTag would change the CreateCommandTag function signature and ideology. CreateCommandTag finds a tag based on the command parse tree, while login event is a specific case when we do not have any command and the parse tree is NULL. Changing CreateCommandTag signature for these two calls looks a little bit overkill as it would lead to changing lots of other places the function is called from.
We could move this snippet to a separate function, but here are the similar concerns I think: it would make sense for a more common or a more complex snippet, but not for two cases of if-else one-liners.--
Hi, Mikhail:
Thanks for the explanation.
It is Okay to keep the current formation of CMDTAG_LOGIN handling.
Cheers
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: