public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Tom Lane <[email protected]>
To: Stepan <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: SPI_connect, SPI_connect_ext return type
Date: Sat, 10 Aug 2024 10:12:04 -0400
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMaYL5Z9Uk8cD9qGz9QaZ2UBJFOu7jFx5Mwbznz-1tBbPDQZow@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAMaYL5Z9Uk8cD9qGz9QaZ2UBJFOu7jFx5Mwbznz-1tBbPDQZow@mail.gmail.com>
Stepan <[email protected]> writes:
> Hi, hackers! If you look at the code in the src/backend/executor/spi.c file,
> you will see the SPI_connect function familiar to many there, which
> internally simply calls SPI_connect_ext. The return type is int, at the end
> it says return SPI_OK_CONNECT;
> It confuses me that nothing but OK, judging by the code, can return.(I
> understand that earlier, before 1833f1a1, it could also return
> SPI_ERROR_CONNECT). Therefore, I suggest making the returned value void
> instead of int and not checking the returned value. What do you think about
> this?
That would break a lot of code (much of it not under our control) to
little purpose; it would also foreclose the option to return to using
SPI_ERROR_CONNECT someday.
We go to a lot of effort to keep the SPI API as stable as we can
across major versions, so I don't see why we'd just randomly make
an API-breaking change like this.
regards, tom lane
view thread (11+ messages) latest in thread
reply
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: SPI_connect, SPI_connect_ext return type
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox