On Mon, Aug 21, 2023 at 5:34 AM Peter Smith <smithpb2...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 18, 2023 at 6:16 PM Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu) > <houzj.f...@fujitsu.com> wrote: > > > > On Friday, August 18, 2023 11:20 AM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 14, 2023 at 12:08 PM Peter Smith <smithpb2...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > The main patch for adding the worker type enum has been pushed [1]. > > > > > > > > Here is the remaining (rebased) patch for changing some previous > > > > cascading if/else to switch on the LogicalRepWorkerType enum instead. > > > > > > > > > > I see this as being useful if we plan to add more worker types. Does > > > anyone else > > > see this remaining patch as an improvement? > > > > +1 > > > > I have one comment for the new error message. > > > > + case WORKERTYPE_UNKNOWN: > > + ereport(ERROR, > > errmsg_internal("should_apply_changes_for_rel: Unknown worker type")); > > > > I think reporting an ERROR in this case is fine. However, I would suggest > > refraining from mentioning the function name in the error message, as > > recommended in the error style document [1]. Also, it appears we could use > > elog() here. > > > > [1] https://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/error-style-guide.html > > OK. Modified as suggested. Anyway, getting these errors should not > even be possible, so I added a comment to emphasise that. > > PSA v9 >
LGTM. I'll push this tomorrow unless there are any more comments. -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.