On Tue, Dec 19, 2023 at 03:44:43PM +0100, Jelte Fennema-Nio wrote: > On Tue, 19 Dec 2023 at 11:59, vignesh C <vignes...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I noticed that this change can be done in several other places too. > > My guess would be that ~90% of all existing foreach loops in the > codebase can be easily rewritten (and simplified) using these new > macros. So converting all of those would likely be quite a bit of > work. In patch 0003 I only converted a few of them to get some > coverage of the new macros and show how much simpler the usage of them > is.
I'm not sure we should proceed with rewriting most/all eligible foreach loops. I think it's fine to use the new macros in new code or to update existing loops in passing when changing nearby code, but rewriting everything likely just introduces back-patching pain in return for little discernible gain. > And even once these patches are merged to master, I think we should > only do any bulk changes if/when we backport these macros to all > supported PG versions. Backporting to PG12 is probably the hardest, > since List its internal layout got heavily changed in PG13. Probably > not too hard though, in Citus we've had similar macros work since > PG11. I'm also not sure what the policy is for backporting patches > that introduce new functions/macros in public headers. Unless there's some way to argue this is a bug, security issue, or data corruption problem [0], I seriously doubt we will back-patch this. [0] https://www.postgresql.org/support/versioning/ -- Nathan Bossart Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
