Re: Remove unused function parameters, part 2: replication
| От | Bertrand Drouvot |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Remove unused function parameters, part 2: replication |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | aS73oLgiNc3Wvzrd@ip-10-97-1-34.eu-west-3.compute.internal обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Remove unused function parameters, part 2: replication (Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>) |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi, On Tue, Dec 02, 2025 at 09:31:34AM +0100, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: > > On 2 Dec 2025, at 08:32, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote: > > > Simple example I have seen in the past: a Relation argument not used > > (I think there has been at least one such example in tablecmds.c, > > whatever). Removing this argument also meant that we don't require > > function callers to open a Relation, removing the need to think about > > the lock it would require at open. Yeah, that's a strong argument. > I think this is the really interesting case and the angle to focus on. If we > can simplify callers to perhaps even avoid locks then that's a stronger case > when considering potential API breaks. It might still be more value in not > breaking API, but that would have to be considered on a case by case basis. I fully agree. That said I'm still skeptical that we need to provide a strong justification (as the one above) to remove an unused parameter. Regards, -- Bertrand Drouvot PostgreSQL Contributors Team RDS Open Source Databases Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: