On Fri, Mar 3, 2023 at 10:04 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 3, 2023 at 4:13 PM Bharath Rupireddy > <bharath.rupireddyforpostg...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jan 19, 2023 at 8:36 AM Peter Smith <smithpb2...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 6:26 PM Bharath Rupireddy > > > <bharath.rupireddyforpostg...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > logicalrep_read_tuple() duplicates code for LOGICALREP_COLUMN_TEXT and > > > > LOGICALREP_COLUMN_BINARY introduced by commit 9de77b5. While it > > > > doesn't hurt anyone, deduplication makes code a bit leaner by 57 bytes > > > > [1]. I've attached a patch for $SUBJECT. > > > > > > > > Thoughts? > > > > > > > > > > The code looks the same but there is a subtle comment difference where > > > previously only LOGICALREP_COLUMN_BINARY case said: > > > /* not strictly necessary but per StringInfo practice */ > > > > > > So if you de-duplicate the code then should that comment be modified to > > > say > > > /* not strictly necessary for LOGICALREP_COLUMN_BINARY but per > > > StringInfo practice */ > > > > Thanks. Done so in the attached v2. > > > > LGTM. Unless Peter or someone has any comments on this, I'll push this > early next week. >
No more comments. Patch v2 LGTM. ------ Kind Regards, Peter Smith. Fujitsu Australia
