> Possibly a better answer is to refactor into separate functions, > along the lines of > > static bool > ConfigOptionIsShowable(struct config_generic *conf) > > static void > GetConfigOptionValues(struct config_generic *conf, const char **values)
Nice suggestion. Attached a patch for the same. Please share the comments if any. Thanks & Regards, Nitin Jadhav On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 9:44 PM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > Nitin Jadhav <nitinjadhavpostg...@gmail.com> writes: > > GetConfigOptionValues function extracts the config parameters for the > > given variable irrespective of whether it results in noshow or not. > > But the parent function show_all_settings ignores the values parameter > > if it results in noshow. It's unnecessary to fetch all the values > > during noshow. So a return statement in GetConfigOptionValues() when > > noshow is set to true is needed. Attached the patch for the same. > > Please share your thoughts. > > I do not think this is an improvement: it causes GetConfigOptionValues > to be making assumptions about how its results will be used. If > show_all_settings() were a big performance bottleneck, and there were > a lot of no-show values that we could optimize, then maybe the extra > coupling would be worthwhile. But I don't believe either of those > things. > > Possibly a better answer is to refactor into separate functions, > along the lines of > > static bool > ConfigOptionIsShowable(struct config_generic *conf) > > static void > GetConfigOptionValues(struct config_generic *conf, const char **values) > > regards, tom lane
v2-0001-Refactor-GetConfigOptionValues-function.patch
Description: Binary data
