From: | Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> |
---|---|
To: | Yugo NAGATA <nagata(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Rename setup_cancel_handler in pg_dump |
Date: | 2024-01-30 12:44:28 |
Message-ID: | 8F0B5F18-59FE-46F0-8270-C7B4B6C342EB@yesql.se |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> On 26 Jan 2024, at 01:42, Yugo NAGATA <nagata(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
> I am proposing it because there is a public function with
> the same name in fe_utils/cancel.c. I know pg_dump/parallel.c
> does not include fe_utils/cancel.h, so there is no conflict,
> but I think it is better to use different names to reduce
> possible confusion.
Given that a "git grep setup_cancel_hander" returns hits in pg_dump along with
other frontend utils, I can see the risk of confusion.
-setup_cancel_handler(void)
+pg_dump_setup_cancel_handler(void)
We don't have any other functions prefixed with pg_dump_, based on the naming
of the surrounding code in the file I wonder if set_cancel_handler is a more
appropriate name?
--
Daniel Gustafsson
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Aleksander Alekseev | 2024-01-30 12:47:36 | Re: Functions to return random numbers in a given range |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2024-01-30 12:36:54 | scram_iterations is undocumented GUC_REPORT |