> On 26 Apr 2023, at 10:33, Richard Guo <guofengli...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 9:51 AM Junwang Zhao <zhjw...@gmail.com > <mailto:zhjw...@gmail.com>> wrote: > `local_traverse_files` and `libpq_traverse_files` both have a > callback parameter but instead use the global process_source_file > which is no good for function encapsulation. > > Nice catch. This should be a typo introduced by 37d2ff38.
Agreed, I'll look at applying this after some testing. > While this patch is doing it correctly, I'm wondering that since both > kinds of source server (libpq and local) are using the same function > (i.e. process_source_file) to process source file list for > traverse_files operations, do we really need to provide a callback? Or > will there be some kind of source server that may use different source > file processing function? While there isn't one right now, removing the callback seems like imposing a restriction that the refactoring in 37d2ff38 aimed to avoid. -- Daniel Gustafsson
