Re: "pgoutput" options missing on documentation

From: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: emre(at)hasegeli(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: "pgoutput" options missing on documentation
Date: 2023-12-19 07:25:08
Message-ID: CAA4eK1KVEcFZ5RAz5uL9B+zrfPUaEeU=BjtPCWfcw+zthFOSiA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Dec 19, 2023 at 12:07 PM Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Dec 19, 2023 at 1:35 AM Emre Hasegeli <emre(at)hasegeli(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > > Fair enough. I think we should push your first patch only in HEAD as
> > > this is a minor improvement over the current behaviour. What do you
> > > think?
> >
> > I agree.
>
> Patch 0001
>
> AFAICT parse_output_parameters possible errors are never tested. For
> example, there is no code coverage [1] touching any of these ereports.
>
> IMO there should be some simple test cases -- I am happy to create
> some tests if you agree they should exist.
>

I don't think having tests for all sorts of error checking will add
much value as compared to the overhead they bring.

> ~~~
>
> While looking at the function parse_output_parameters() I noticed that
> if an unrecognised option is passed the function emits an elog instead
> of an ereport
>

We don't expect unrecognized option here and for such a thing, we use
elog in the code. See the similar usage in
parseCreateReplSlotOptions().

I think we should move to 0002 patch now. In that, I suggest preparing
separate back branch patches.

--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Li, Yong 2023-12-19 07:28:19 Re: Proposal to add page headers to SLRU pages
Previous Message Japin Li 2023-12-19 06:58:30 Re: [DOC] Introducing Quick Start Guide to PL/pgSQL and PL/Python Documentation