Re: two occurrences of assign print_notnull within pg_dump.c

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
To: Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: jian he <jian(dot)universality(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: two occurrences of assign print_notnull within pg_dump.c
Date: 2025-04-03 11:30:08
Message-ID: 202504031130.ipdof3fjrezf@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2025-Apr-03, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:

> On Thu, Apr 3, 2025 at 4:31 PM jian he <jian(dot)universality(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > hi.
> >
> > in src/bin/pg_dump/pg_dump.c
> > within function dumpTableSchema:
> > there are two occurrences of:
> > print_notnull = (tbinfo->notnull_constrs[j] != NULL &&
> > (tbinfo->notnull_islocal[j] ||
> > dopt->binary_upgrade ||
> > tbinfo->ispartition));
>
> The same commit 14e87ffa5c543b5f30ead7413084c25f7735039f modified
> existing definition of print_notnull and added another. I wonder why.
> - probably just an oversight or define to closer to usage. But we
> don't do the latter.

Hmm, this was probably a borked merge.

--
Álvaro Herrera PostgreSQL Developer — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
"The Gord often wonders why people threaten never to come back after they've
been told never to return" (www.actsofgord.com)

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Heikki Linnakangas 2025-04-03 11:33:13 Re: Make query cancellation keys longer
Previous Message Daniel Gustafsson 2025-04-03 11:29:21 Re: Make query cancellation keys longer