| From: | Greg Nancarrow <gregn4422(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: PublicationActions - use bit flags. |
| Date: | 2022-01-25 06:14:58 |
| Message-ID: | CAJcOf-eb1wvGCVzMBQH++ubQ3TDwwmqva0uy5w20Y2KUpWkN=A@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 7:31 AM Peter Eisentraut <
peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Why can't GetRelationPublicationActions() have the PublicationActions as
> a return value, instead of changing it to an output argument?
That would be OK too, for now, for the current (small size, typically
4-byte) PublicationActions struct.
But if that function was extended in the future to return more publication
information than just the PublicationActions struct (and I'm seeing that in
the filtering patches [1]), then using return-by-value won't be as
efficient as pass-by-reference, and I'd tend to stick with
pass-by-reference in that case.
[1]
https://postgr.es/m/OS0PR01MB5716B899A66D2997EF28A1B3945F9%40OS0PR01MB5716.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com
Regards,
Greg Nancarrow
Fujitsu Australia
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2022-01-25 06:29:10 | Re: [BUG]Update Toast data failure in logical replication |
| Previous Message | Peter Smith | 2022-01-25 05:54:42 | Re: row filtering for logical replication |