On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 09:39:19AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 9:10 AM Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz> wrote: >> Err, actually, I am going to disagree here for the patch of HEAD. It >> seems to me that there is zero need for pgoutput.h and we don't need >> to show PGOutputData to the world. The structure is internal to >> Pgoutput.c and used only by its internal static routines. > > Do you disagree with the approach for the PG16 patch or HEAD? You > mentioned HEAD but your argument sounds like you disagree with a > different approach for PG16.
Only HEAD where the structure should be moved from pgoutput.h to pgoutput.c, IMO. The proposed patch for PG16 is OK as the size of the structure should not change in a branch already released. -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
