From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Nitin Jadhav <nitinjadhavpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Improve GetConfigOptionValues function |
Date: | 2023-01-18 16:14:47 |
Message-ID: | 3577627.1674058487@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Nitin Jadhav <nitinjadhavpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> GetConfigOptionValues function extracts the config parameters for the
> given variable irrespective of whether it results in noshow or not.
> But the parent function show_all_settings ignores the values parameter
> if it results in noshow. It's unnecessary to fetch all the values
> during noshow. So a return statement in GetConfigOptionValues() when
> noshow is set to true is needed. Attached the patch for the same.
> Please share your thoughts.
I do not think this is an improvement: it causes GetConfigOptionValues
to be making assumptions about how its results will be used. If
show_all_settings() were a big performance bottleneck, and there were
a lot of no-show values that we could optimize, then maybe the extra
coupling would be worthwhile. But I don't believe either of those
things.
Possibly a better answer is to refactor into separate functions,
along the lines of
static bool
ConfigOptionIsShowable(struct config_generic *conf)
static void
GetConfigOptionValues(struct config_generic *conf, const char **values)
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2023-01-18 16:28:57 | Re: almost-super-user problems that we haven't fixed yet |
Previous Message | Vik Fearing | 2023-01-18 16:03:55 | Re: ANY_VALUE aggregate |