On 03/02/22 02:46, Michael Paquier wrote: > system function marked as proretset while it builds and returns only > one record. And this is a popular one: pg_stop_backup(), labelled > v2.
I had just recently noticed that while reviewing [0], but shrugged, as I didn't know what the history was. Is this best handled as a separate patch, or folded into [0], which is going to be altering and renaming that function anyway? On 03/02/22 09:31, Robert Haas wrote: > On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 5:25 AM Aleksander Alekseev >> Since it doesn't seem to be used for anything except these two array >> declarations I suggest keeping simply "3" here. > > I think we do this kind of thing in various places in similar > situations, and I think it is good style. It makes it easier to catch > everything if you ever need to update the code. I've been known (in other projects) to sometimes accomplish the same thing with, e.g., Datum values[3]; bool nulls[sizeof values / sizeof *values]; Doesn't win any beauty contests, but just one place to change the length if it needs changing. I see we define a lengthof in c.h, so could use: Datum values[3]; bool nulls[lengthof(values)]; Regards, -Chap [0] https://commitfest.postgresql.org/37/3436/
