| From: | Stepan Neretin <sndcppg(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: SPI_connect, SPI_connect_ext return type |
| Date: | 2024-08-10 18:34:43 |
| Message-ID: | CAMaYL5Yb=3uPOQm2gufqqSDed9Z13Ow0_NhVW1MXyoEwgrmfSQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> I'd give it decent odds since our example usage doesn't include the test.
> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/spi-examples.html
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/trigger-example.html
<https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/spi-examples.html>
> /* connect to SPI manager */
> if ((ret = SPI_connect()) < 0)
> elog(ERROR, "trigf (fired %s): SPI_connect returned %d", when, ret);
in this page check include in the example.
I think we need to give examples of one kind. If there is no void in
the code, then there should be checks everywhere (at least in the
documentation).
What do you think about the attached patch?
Best Regards, Stepan Neretin.
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| v1-0001-Fix-SPI-Documentation.patch | text/x-patch | 1.4 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2024-08-10 18:38:03 | Re: is_superuser versus set_config_option's parallelism check |
| Previous Message | Nathan Bossart | 2024-08-10 18:32:35 | Re: is_superuser versus set_config_option's parallelism check |